2 0 0 6 A N N U A L R E P O R T

PROPERTY LOCATIONSPS Business Parks, Inc.

(As of December 31, 2006)

Southern CaliforniaRentable Square Feet: 3,985,000Buena ParkCarsonCerritosCulver CityIrvineLaguna HillsLake ForestMonterey ParkOrangeSan DiegoSanta AnaSignal HillStudio CityTorrance

Northern CaliforniaRentable Square Feet: 1,567,000HaywardMontereySacramentoSan JoseSan RamonSanta ClaraSouth San Francisco

OregonRentable Square Feet: 1,314,000BeavertonMilwaukie

WashingtonRentable Square Feet: 28,000Renton

ArizonaRentable Square Feet: 679,000MesaPhoenixTempe

Northern TexasRentable Square Feet: 1,689,000DallasFarmers BranchGarlandIrvingMesquitePlanoRichardson

Southern TexasRentable Square Feet: 1,161,000AustinHoustonMissouri City

VirginiaRentable Square Feet: 2,894,000AlexandriaChantillyFairfaxHerndonLortonMerrifieldSpringfieldSterlingWoodbridge

MarylandRentable Square Feet: 1,770,000BeltsvilleGaithersburgRockvilleSilver Spring

FloridaRentable Square Feet: 3,596,000Boca RatonMiamiWellington

12/31/01 12/31/02 12/31/03 12/31/04 12/31/05 12/31/06

PS Business Parks, Inc. $100.00 $104.46 $140.03 $157.27 $176.07 $257.90

AMEX Index $100.00 $ 97.26 $138.45 $169.22 $207.53 $242.62

NAREIT Equity Index $100.00 $103.82 $142.37 $187.33 $210.12 $283.79

CUMULATIVE TOTAL RETURN

PS Business Parks, Inc., AMEX Index and NAREIT Equity IndexDecember 31, 2001 - December 31, 2006

$300

$250

$200

$150

$100

$ 5012/31/01 12/31/02 12/31/03 12/31/04 12/31/05 12/31/06

The graph set forth above compares the yearly change in the cumulative total shareholder return on the Common Stock of the Companyfor the five-year period ended December 31, 2006 to the cumulative total return of the American Stock Exchange Composite IndexMarket Cap-Weight (“AMEX Index”) and the National Association of Real Estate Investment Trusts Equity Index (“NAREIT EquityIndex”) for the same period (total shareholder return equals price appreciation plus dividends). The stock price performance graphassumes that the value of the investment in the Company’s Common Stock and each Index was $100 on December 31, 2001 and thatall dividends were reinvested. The stock price performance shown in the graph is not necessarily indicative of future price performance.

TO OUR SHAREHOLDERSPS Business Parks, Inc.

FROM THE PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

PS Business Parks’ StrategyPS Business Parks’ strategy is to own and operate multi-tenant flex, office and industrialbuildings that can be configured to support users of space in economically vibrant markets. Ourgoal is to invest in well located, quality assets and operate them in ways that consistently producemarket-leading results. We differentiate ourselves by providing exceptional value to ourcustomers within well located and professionally managed properties. We have highly trainedand experienced teams of PSB professionals entrenched in each of our markets, standing readyto be nimble and efficient to serve their customers’ needs. Central to PSB’s strategy is a capitalstructure that is conservative and strong, facilitating an ability to retain significant levels of cashto reinvest in both existing and new properties. These core elements of PS Business Parks’strategy combine to produce exceptional results, allowing us to achieve our ultimate goal:enhancing long-term shareholder value.

Markets Demonstrated GrowthEconomic health across PSB’s markets was evident as 2006 began, and momentum grew as theyear progressed. The traditionally stronger markets of Southern California, South Florida andWashington D.C. remained vibrant. Demand also improved in Texas, Northern California andPortland, areas that had been hardest hit in prior years. The end result was positive market netabsorption in nearly all of the areas in which we operate for the second consecutive year. Inaddition, there was limited speculative development of our product type, especially marketswhere land inventory is scarce. This has been the case for several years.

PSB’s portfolio took impressive steps forward as well, as full year company occupancy grew from92.2% in 2005 to 93.4% in 2006. By year end, occupancy levels had reached 94%, our highestlevel since 2002. Leasing volume was strong, and our teams executed approximately 4.7 millionsquare feet in 1,285 separate transactions. As we tackled this leasing volume, we took additionalsteps to drive down the average size of the transactions completed. In fact, this year the averagetransaction size dropped to 3,700 square feet from 4,325 square feet in 2005. Even as marketconditions improve, there are simply more users seeking space in smaller increments, and we likethe fact that our portfolio is well suited to capture this vibrant component of the market, whetherit is flex, office or industrial space. Growth in customer demand and occupancy also facilitatedpositive net operating income (NOI), which increased 2.9% on a Same Park basis.

Reducing Transaction CostsAn important element of our operating strategy is to minimize the level of ongoing capitalrequired to achieve our leasing volume and net operating income. By doing so, we are able to

retain higher levels of cash, which we can use for other alternatives, such as acquiring assets orinvesting in our stock. The good news is that PSB’s transaction costs trended down again in2006, driven by two primary factors. First, market conditions shifted from once onerous levelswhen landlords competed aggressively to fill vacant space. Second, and more importantly, thesimple and generic nature of small space, whether flex, industrial or office, enables us to containhigher fees as we lease our properties. In total, transaction costs totaled $1.30 per square foot,compared to $1.56 per square foot last year and substantially below the high water mark of$1.90 per square foot in 2004, when market conditions heavily favored the tenant. As a result,retained cash improved by 43%, totaling $44 million, allowing for more capital to be investedin other areas of our business.

Investment ActivityThe investment market was extremely competitive, as capital flows into commercial real estateremained strong. Investors aggressively pursued our product type, pushing values to levels wehave not seen in recent memory. Even with this competitive pressure, we were fortunate to findseveral unique opportunities to grow the portfolio, both in existing and new submarkets. Intotal, $180 million was invested by acquiring approximately 1.2 million square feet of assets thatare strategically aligned with our long-term investment goals. The properties have average inplace customer sizes of 5,600 square feet, with additional building flexibility to reduce tenantsuites if desirable over time. Approximately 265,000 square feet of the properties acquired are inestablished PSB markets of Los Angeles, San Jose and Chantilly, Northern Virginia. Here, wewere able to acquire flex assets in close proximity to other PSB facilities, deepening our marketpresence. We also expanded into new submarkets in Silver Spring, Maryland, and Palm BeachCounty. In Silver Spring, we acquired a combination of multi-tenant office and flex buildingstotaling 530,000 square feet, in a market that complements our existing holdings throughoutMetropolitan Washington D.C., where we now own approximately 4.7 million square feet. InPalm Beach County, we also acquired two flex parks totaling 400,000 square feet. This is ourfirst investment in South Florida outside of Miami, and we are encouraged by the economicdrivers in Palm Beach County and look forward to continuing our growth in this area. In SouthFlorida, PSB owns approximately 3.6 million square feet of industrial and flex space. Some ofthe acquired assets require minor physical refurbishment, but most importantly, will showimproved levels of success by inserting PSB’s management and leasing personnel. We areconfident that our teams will quickly begin to extract the same exceptional growth in these newassets that we are delivering in our established portfolio.

Financial StrengthPS Business Parks’ capital structure remains healthy and strong, and as we grew in 2006, wemaintained an enviable balance sheet with nominal levels of traditional debt. Our fixed chargeratio exceeded three times by year end, and our FFO and FAD payout ratios were 31.6% and42.8%, respectively. Solid financial metrics such as these fuel continued growth in the Company,but if internally generated levels of retained cash and proceeds from dispositions are insufficient

to fund additional growth, we are able to efficiently issue additional levels of equity or debt. Thisyear, we generated approximately $95 million of cash through issuance of perpetual preferredequity. Our reliance on perpetual preferred equity has served the Company well, as we have seenhigh levels of investor interest in PSB’s preferred equity, having issued approximately $791million of this security in ten separate transactions over the last three years. With the positivetrend in interest rates, the in place yield on our perpetual preferred equity decreased from 8.9%three years ago to 7.2% today. This has had a positive and long lasting impact on our permanentcost of capital and our ability to increase retained cash.

As PSB has grown in size and stature, we have also seen validation of the sustainability of oureconomic strength, and in 2006 that came in two forms. In May, the Company’s preferredequity was upgraded by Moody’s to investment grade, further improving the Company’s abilityto access attractively priced capital. This year we were also added to Standard & Poor’sSmallCap 600 Index.

SummaryOn several fronts, 2006 was an exceptional year at PS Business Parks. Externally, the marketsin which we choose to invest in flex, office and industrial properties improved, facilitatingour ability to improve operational performance. As importantly, the strategy of focusing onsmall users in multi-tenant environments also affords us the ability to out-perform markets,as PSB’s exceptionally talented teams extract value from their unique and proven ability tostay nimble and close to our customers. The Company’s financial structure remainsincredibly strong, giving us the opportunity to grow the enterprise to extract long-term valuefrom existing and acquired properties. In 2006, PSB delivered to our shareholders a totalreturn of 46%, a one year record for the Company. And, in the nine years as a public entity,we have also provided our shareholders significant long-term value, as PS Business Parks hasdelivered a total return of 337%.

As we embark on our goals for 2007, we are encouraged by a number of factors. The economyis quite healthy and our customer base is showing continued vibrancy and growth. Our teamsare mobilized and energized to find opportunities to provide excellent shareholder returns, as wenavigate through improving market fundamentals. We are committed to our strategy ofinvesting in what we feel is the most dynamic and dependable component of commercial realestate: small user flex, office and industrial assets.

Thank you for your continued confidence in our abilities.

Joseph D. Russell, Jr.President and Chief Executive Officer March 22, 2007

FROM THE CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD

With favorable market conditions and a solid balance sheet, we were able to createmeaningful value for our owners. This was a year in which commercial real estatefundamentals improved measurably in each of our markets. Continued strength in theeconomy facilitated improved operating metrics in 2006 and paved the way for continuedsuccess and growth in 2007.

Reflecting improving conditions in the commercial real estate environment in 2006, fundsfrom operations, which is a key industry metric measuring the operating performance of theCompany, excluding non-cash items such as depreciation, increased from $3.50 in 2005 to$3.83 in 2006. Improved market conditions also enabled the Company to substantiallyimprove its cash flow. Funds available for distribution, the cash available to distribute to ourshareholders after necessary capital expenditures, were $2.68 per share in 2006, compared to$2.21 in 2005. Net income in 2006 was $0.77 per diluted share while 2005 net income perdiluted share was $1.47. The decrease was primarily a factor of gains on asset sales in 2005as well as non-cash distributions that the Company realized in 2006 as it redeemed high ratepreferred equity. A schedule reconciling funds from operations and funds available fordistribution to net income is included in this report.

As I have repeatedly stated, measuring our results on a per share basis provides the mostmeaningful view for our shareholders, as changes in business size mean little unless translatedinto value for our owners.

Operating ReviewThis was a year of transition, with each quarter bringing improving market conditionsand corresponding improvements in our results. We have teams of seasoned real estateprofessionals positioned across the country in each of our markets with the knowledgeand drive to seize every opportunity in their markets to bring added value to theCompany.

Commercial real estate fundamentals remained robust during 2006 making it challenging tofind opportunities to invest capital on assets we believe enhance the underlying value of theCompany. During 2006, the Company acquired 1.2 million square feet of multi-tenant realestate. With an aggregate purchase price exceeding $180 million, these assets complementour existing product in key markets such as Washington D.C., Southern California andSouth Florida.

T o t a l S h a r e h o l d e r R e t u r n s

The following chart compares the operating results of our Same Park assets and highlightsthe fact that 2006 was the second year in a row we were able to report positive Same Parkgrowth as a result of improving market conditions.

2006 2005 2004 2003 2002

Rental income growth 3.7% 3.1% (2.0%) (0.2%) 1.4%

Cost of operations growth 5.7% 3.3% 1.9% 1.8% 3.9%

Net operating income growth 2.9% 3.0% (3.2%) (0.9%) 0.5%

Annual weighted average occupancy 93.4% 92.2% 90.5% 92.7% 94.3%

Going into 2007, we anticipate that market conditions should continue to improve, resultingin a greater ability to increase rents, further reduce transaction costs and limit exposure toless viable tenants. With the winds shifting to our back, we expect to be able to negotiatelease transactions that will continue to improve our operating metrics and increase the valueof the enterprise.

In 2006, the stock outperformed both the NAREIT Equity Index and S&P 500.

Cumulative Returnas a Public Company Five Years Three Years One Year

PSB 337.1% 157.9% 84.2% 46.5%

NAREIT Equity Index 221.7% 183.8% 99.3% 35.1%

S&P 500 Index 65.1% 35.0% 34.7% 15.8%

S a m e P a r k R a t e s o f G r o w t h

Over the past nine years as a publicly traded entity, we have been a sound investment for ourowners providing a cumulative total return, which includes appreciation in stock pricecombined with dividends paid, of 337.1%. This is particularly impressive when comparedto the NAREIT Equity Index delivering a cumulative total return of 221.7% and the S&P500 Index delivering 65.1% over the same period.

Our goal has been and will continue to be to create shareholder value for the long term. Aslong as we relentlessly pursue this goal, we will have a good opportunity to provide solid totalreturns to you our owners.

Ronald L. Havner, Jr.Chairman of the BoardMarch 22, 2007

For the Years EYY nded December 31,,2006 2005

Computation of Dp iluted Funds FrFF om Operations per Common Sp p hare (“FFO”)(1):( )( )

Net income allocable to common shareholders $ 16,647 $ 32,283Adjustments:

Gain on disposition of real estate (2,328) (18,109)Depreciation and amortization 86,243 77,420Minority interest in income - common units 5,673 10,869

FFO allocable to common shareholders/unit holders $106,235 $102,463

Weighted average common shares outstanding 21,335 21,826Weighted average common OP units outstanding 7,305 7,305Weighted average common share equivalents outstanding 311 192

Weighted average common shares and OP units for purposesof computing fully-diluted FFO per common share 28,951 29,323

Diluted FFO per common share equivalent $ 3.67 $ 3.49

Computation of Fp unds AvAA ailable for Distribution (“F( AD”)(2):FF )( )

FFO allocable to common shareholders $106,235 $102,463

Adjustments:Capital improvements (10,773) (8,075)Tenant improvements (17,989) (19,179)Lease commissions (5,334) (8,567)Straight-line rent (2,804) (3,635)Stock based compensation expense 2,845 1,060In-place lease adjustment 232 155Lease incentives net of tenant improvement reimbursements 440 144Redemption amount over carrying amount related to

redeemed preferred equity 4,746 301

FAD $ 77,598 $ 64,667

Distributions to common shareholders and unit holders $ 33,192 $ 33,789

Distribution payout ratio 42.8% 52.3%

Computation of Funds from Operations (“FFO”) and Funds Available for Distribution (“FAD”)(Unaudited, in thousands, except per share amounts)

(1) Funds From Operations (“FFO”) is computed in accordance with the White Paper on FFO approved by the Board y of Governorsof the National Association of Real Estate Investment Trusts (“NAREIT”). The White Paper defines FFO as net income, computedin accordance with generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”), before depreciation, amortization, minority interest inincome, gains or losses on asset dispositions and extraordinary items. FFO should be analyzed in conjunction with net income.However, FFO should not be viewed as a substitute for net income as a measure of operating performance or liquidity as it does notreflect depreciation and amortization costs or the level of capital expenditure and leasing costs necessary to maintain the operatingperformance of the Company's properties, which are significant economic costs and could materially impact the Company's resultsfrom operations. Other REITs may use different methods for calculating FFO and, accordingly, the Company's FFO may not becomparable to other real estate companies.

(2) Funds available for distribution (“FAD”) is computed by deducting from consolidated FFO recurring capital expenditures, which theCompany defines as those costs incurred to maintain the assets' value, tenant improvements, capitalized leasing commissions andstraight-line rent from FFO and adding impairment charges and stock based compensation expense, amortization of leaseincentives, in-place rents adjustment and the impact of EITF Topic D-42. Like FFO, the Company considers FAD to be a usefulmeasure for investors to evaluate the operations and cash flows of a REIT. FAD does not represent net income or cash flow fromoperations as defined by GAAP.

UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIESEXCHANGE ACT OF 1934For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2006.

orTRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934For the transition period from to

Commission File Number 1-10709

PS BUSINESS PARKS, INC. (Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

California 95-4300881(State or other jurisdiction of (I.R.S. Employer Identification No.)

incorporation or organization)

701 Western Avenue, Glendale, California 91201-2397 (Address of principal executive offices) (Zip Code)

818-244-8080 (Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

Title of Each Class Name of Each Exchange on Which Registered Common Stock, $0.01 par value per share American Stock Exchange Depositary Shares Each Representing 1/1,000 of a Share of 7.000% Cumulative Preferred Stock, Series H, $0.01 par value per share American Stock Exchange Depositary Shares Each Representing 1/1,000 of a Share of 6.875% Cumulative Preferred Stock, Series I, $0.01 par value per share American Stock ExchangeDepositary Shares Each Representing 1/1,000 of a Share of 7.950% Cumulative Preferred Stock, Series K, $0.01 par value per share American Stock Exchange Depositary Shares Each Representing 1/1,000 of a Share of 7.600% Cumulative Preferred Stock, Series L, $0.01 par value per share American Stock ExchangeDepositary Shares Each Representing 1/1,000 of a Share of 7.200% Cumulative Preferred Stock, Series M, $0.01 par value per share American Stock Exchange Depositary Shares Each Representing 1/1,000 of a Share of 7.375% Cumulative Preferred Stock, Series O, $0.01 par value per share American Stock Exchange Depositary Shares Each Representing 1/1,000 of a Share of 6.700% Cumulative Preferred Stock, Series P, $0.01 par value per share American Stock Exchange

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: None

(Title of class)

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes No

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Exchange Act. Yes No

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports) and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes ff No

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of theregistrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K.

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, or a non-accelerated filer. See definition of “accelerated filer and large accelerated filer” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. Large Accelerated Filer Accelerated Filer Non-accelerated Filer

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes No

As of June 30, 2006, the aggregate market value of the registrant’s common stock held by non-affiliates of the registrant was $936,035,059 based on the closing price asreported on the American Stock Exchange.

Number of shares of the registrant’s common stock, par value $0.01 per share, outstanding as of February 23, 2007 (the latest practicable date): 21,318,663.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

Portions of the definitive proxy statement to be filed in connection with the Annual Meeting of Shareholders to be held in 2007 are incorporated by reference into Part III of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

2

PART I.

ITEM 1. BUSINESS

The Company

PS Business Parks, Inc. (“PSB”) is a fully-integrated, self-advised and self-managed real estate investment trust (“REIT”) that acquires, develops, owns and operates commercial properties, primarily multi-tenant flex, office and industrial space. As of December 31, 2006, PSB owned approximately 75% of the common partnership units of PSBusiness Parks, L.P. (the “Operating Partnership” or “OP”). The remaining common partnership units were owned by Public Storage, Inc. (“PSI” or “Public Storage”). PSB, as the sole general partner of the Operating Partnership,has full, exclusive and complete responsibility and discretion in managing and controlling the Operating Partnership.Unless otherwise indicated or unless the context requires otherwise, all references to “the Company,” “we,” “us,”tt“our,” and similar references mean PS Business Parks, Inc. and its subsidiaries, including the Operating Partnership.

As of December 31, 2006, the Company owned and operated approximately 18.7 million rentable square feet of commercial space located in eight states: Arizona, California, Florida, Maryland, Oregon, Texas, Virginia, and Washington. The Company also manages approximately 1.4 million rentable square feet on behalf of PSI and its affiliated entities.

History of the Company: The Company was formed in 1990 as a California corporation under the name Public Storage Properties XI, Inc. In a March 17, 1998 merger with American Office Park Properties, Inc. (“AOPP”) (the“Merger”), the Company acquired the commercial property business previously operated by AOPP and wasrenamed “PS Business Parks, Inc.” Prior to the merger in January, 1997, AOPP was reorganized to succeed to the commercial property business of PSI, becoming a fully integrated, self advised and self managed REIT.

From 1998 through 2001, the Company added 9.7 million square feet in Virginia, Maryland, Texas, Oregon,California and Arizona, acquiring 9.2 million square feet of commercial space from unaffiliated third parties and developing an additional 500,000 square feet.

In 2002, the economy and real estate fundamentals softened. This resulted in an environment in which the Company was unable to identify acquisitions at prices that met its investment criteria. The Company disposed of four properties totaling 386,000 square feet that no longer met its investment criteria.

In 2003, the Company acquired 4.1 million square feet of commercial space from unaffiliated third parties, including a 3.4 million square foot property located in Miami, Florida, which represented a new market for the Company. The Miami property represented approximately 18% of the Company’s aggregate rentable square footage at December 31, 2003. The cost of these acquisitions was $282.4 million. The Company also disposed of four properties totaling 226,000 square feet as well as a one acre plot of land that no longer met its investment criteria. t

In 2004, the Company made only one acquisition, a 165,000 square foot asset in Fairfax, Virginia, for $24.1 million. During 2004, the Company sold two significant assets, comprising 400,000 square feet in Maryland resulting in a gain of $15.2 million. Additionally in 2004, the Company sold an aggregate of 91,000 square feet inTexas, Oregon and Miami.

In 2005, the Company acquired one asset, a 233,000 square foot multi-tenant flex space in San Diego, California. The asset, which was 94.6% leased at the time of acquisition, was purchased for $35.1 million. In connection with the acquisition, the Company assumed a $15.0 million mortgage which bears interest at a fixed rate of 5.73%. During 2005, the Company sold Woodside Corporate Park, a 574,000 square foot flex and office park in Beaverton, Oregon, for $64.5 million resulting in a gain of $12.5 million. The park was 76.8% leased at the time of the sale. Additionally in 2005, the Company sold 100,000 square feet and some parcels of land in Miami and Oregon.

In 2006, the Company acquired 1.2 million square feet for an aggregate cost of $180.3 million. The Company acquired WesTech Business Park, a 366,000 square foot office and flex park in Silver Spring, Maryland, for $69.3 million; a 88,800 square foot multi-tenant flex park in Signal Hill, California, for $10.7 million; a 107,300 square

3

foot multi-tenant flex park in Chantilly, Virginia, for $15.8 million, Meadows Corporate Park; a 165,000 square foot multi-tenant office park in Silver Spring, Maryland, for $29.9 million; Rogers Avenue, a 66,500 square foot multi-tenant industrial and flex park in San Jose, California, for $8.4 million; and Boca Commerce Park and Wellington Commerce Park, two multi-tenant industrial, flex and storage parks, aggregating 398,000 square feet, located in Palm Beach County, Florida, for $46.2 million. In connection with the Meadows Corporate Park purchase, theCompany assumed a $16.8 million mortgage with a fixed interest rate of 7.20% through November, 2011, at whichtime it can be prepaid without penalty. In addition, in connection with the Palm Beach County purchases, the Company assumed three mortgages with a combined total of $23.8 million with a weighted average fixed interest frate of 5.84%. During 2006, the Company sold a 30,500 square foot building located in Beaverton, Oregon, for $4.4million resulting in a gain of $1.5 million. Additionally in 2006, the Company sold 32,400 square feet in Miami for a combined total of $3.7 million, resulting in a gain of $865,000.

The Company has elected to be taxed as a REIT under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”), commencing with its taxable year ended December 31, 1990. To the extent that the Company continues to qualify as a REIT, it will not be taxed, with certain limited exceptions, on the net income that is currently distributed to its shareholders.

The Company’s principal executive offices are located at 701 Western Avenue, Glendale, California 91201-2397. The Company’s telephone number is (818) 244-8080. The Company maintains a website with the address www.psbusinessparks.com. The information contained on the Company’s website is not a part of, or incorporated by reference into, this Annual Report on Form 10-K. The Company makes available free of charge through its website its Annual Report on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q and Current Reports on Form 8-K, and amendments to these reports, as soon as reasonably practicable after the Company electronically files such material with, or furnishes such material to, the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Business of the Company: The Company is in the commercial property business, with properties consisting of multi-tenant flex, industrial, and office space. The Company owns approximately 11.5 million square feet of flex space. The Company defines “flex” space as buildings that are configured with a cot mbination of warehouse and office space and can be designed to fit a wide variety of uses. The warehouse component of the flex space has a fnumber of uses including light manufacturing and assembly, storage and warehousing, showroom, laboratory,distribution and research and development activities. The office component of flex space is complementary to theffwarehouse component by enabling businesses to accommodate management and production staff in the same facility. The Company owns approximately 3.9 million square feet of industrial space that have characteristicssimilar to the warehouse component of the flex space. In addition, the Company owns approximately 3.3 millionsquare feet of low-rise office space, generally either in business parks that combine office and flex space or in tsubmarkets where the economics of the market demand an office build-out.

The Company’s commercial properties typically consist of low-rise buildings, ranging from one to over fiftybuildings per property, located on up to 216 acres and comprising from approximately 12,000 to 3.2 million aggregate square feet of rentable space. Facilities are managed through either on-site management or area offices central to the facilities. Parking is generally open but in some instances is covered. The ratio of parking spaces torentable square feet ranges from two to six per thousand square feet depending upon the use of the property and itslocation. Office space generally requires a greater parking ratio than most industrial uses. The Company mayacquire properties that do not have these characteristics.

The tenant base for the Company’s facilities is diverse. The portfolio can be bifurcated into those facilities thatservice small to medium-sized businesses and those that service larger businesses. Approximately 39.7% of in-placerents from the portfolio are from facilities that serve small to medium-sized businesses. A property in this facilitytype is typically divided into units ranging in size from 500 to 4,999 square feet and leases generally range from oneto three years. The remaining 60.3% of the in-place rents are derived from facilities that serve larger businesses, mwith units greater than or equal to 5,000 square feet. The Company also has several tenants that lease space in multiple buildings and locations. The U.S. Government is the largest tenant with leases encompassing 469,000 square feet, in 12 separate locations, or approximately 5.1% of the Company’s annual revenue.

The Company intends to continue acquiring commercial properties located in its target markets within the United States. The Company’s policy of acquiring commercial properties may be changed by its Board of Directors without

4

shareholder approval. However, the Board of Directors has no intention of changing this policy at this time. Although the Company currently owns properties in eight states, it may expand its operations to other states or reduce the number of states in which it operates. Properties are acquired for both income and potential capital appreciation; there is no limitation on the amount that can be invested in any specific property. Although there are no restrictions on our ability to expand our operations into foreign markets, we currently operate solely within the United States and have no foreign operations.

The Company has acquired land for the development of commercial properties. The Company owned approximately 6.4 acres of land in Northern Virginia, 14.9 acres in Portland, Oregon, 1.0 acre in Rockville, Maryland and 10.0 acres in Dallas, Texas as of December 31, 2006.

Operating Partnership

The properties in which the Company has an equity interest will generally be owned by the Operating Partnership. The Company has the ability to acquire interests in additional properties in transactions that could defer the contributors’ tax consequences by causing the Operating Partnership to issue equity interests in return for interests in properties.

As the general partner of the Operating Partnership, the Company has the exclusive responsibility under theOperating Partnership Agreement to manage and conduct the business of the Operating Partnership. The Board of Directors directs the affairs of the Operating Partnership by managing the Company’s affairs. The Operating Partnership will be responsible for, and pay when due, its share of all administrative and operating expenses of theproperties it owns.

The Company’s interest in the Operating Partnership entitles it to share in cash distributions from, and the profits and losses of, the Operating Partnership in proportion to the Company’s economic interest in the OperatingPartnership (apart from tax allocations of profits and losses to take into account pre-contribution property appreciation or depreciation).

Summary of the Operating Partnership Agreement

The following summary of the Operating Partnership Agreement is qualified in its entirety by reference to the Operating Partnership Agreement as amended, which is incorporated by reference as an exhibit to this report.

Issuance of Additional Partnership Interests: As the general partner of the Operating Partnership, the Company is authorized to cause the Operating Partnership from time to time to issue to partners of the Operating Partnershipor to other persons additional partnership units in one or more classes, and in one or more series of any of suchclasses, with such designations, preferences and relative, participating, optional, or other special rights, powers andaaduties (which may be senior to the existing partnership units), as will be determined by the Company, in its sole and absolute discretion, without the approval of any limited partners, except to the extent specifically provided in the agreement. No such additional partnership units, however, will be issued to the Company unless (i) the agreement to issue the additional partnership interests arises in connection with the issuance of shares of the Company, which shares have designations, preferences and other rights, such that the economic interests are substantially similar tothe designations, preferences and other rights of the additional partnership units that would be issued to the Company and (ii) the Company agrees to make a capital contribution to the Operating Partnership in an amount equal to the proceeds raised in connection with the issuance of such shares of the Company.

Capital Contributions: No partner is required to make additional capital contributions to the OperatingPartnership, except that the Company as the general partner is required to contribute the proceeds of the sale of equity interests in the Company to the Operating Partnership in return for additional partnership units. A limitedpartner may be required to pay to the Operating Partnership any taxes paid by the Operating Partnership on behalf of that limited partner. No partner is required to pay to the Operating Partnership any deficit or negative balance which may exist in its capital account.

Distributions: The Company, as general partner, is required to distribute at least quarterly the “available cash”(as defined in the Operating Partnership Agreement) generated by the Operating Partnership for such quarter.

5

Distributions are to be made (i) first, with respect to any class of partnership interests having a preference over other classes of partnership interests; and (ii) second, in accordance with the partners’ respective percentage interests on the “partnership record date” (as defined in the Operating Partnership Agreement). Commencing in 1998, theOperating Partnership’s policy has been to make distributions per unit (other than preferred units) that are equal tothe per share distributions made by the Company with respect to its common stock.

Preferred Units: As of December 31, 2006, the Operating Partnership had an aggregate of 3.3 million preferred units owned by third parties with distribution rates ranging from 7.125% to 7.950% (per annum) with an aggregate stated value of $82.8 million. The Operating Partnership has the right to redeem each series of preferred units on or mafter the fifth anniversary of the issuance date of the series at the original capital contribution plus the cumulative priority return, as defined, to the redemption date to the extent not previously distributed. Each series of preferred units is exchangeable for Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock of the respective series of PS Business Parks, Inc.on or after the tenth anniversary of the date of issuance at the option of the Operating Partnership or a majority of the holders of the applicable series of preferred units.

As of December 31, 2006, in connection with the Company’s issuance of publicly traded Cumulative Preferred Stock, the Company owned 24.9 million preferred units of various series with a stated value of $622.5 million with terms substantially identical to the terms of the publicly traded depositary shares each representing 1/1,000 of ashare of 6.875% to 8.750% Cumulative Preferred Stock of the Company. On December 15, 2006, the Company called 2.0 million depositary shares ($50.0 million) of its 8.750% Cumulative Preferred Stock, Series F for January 29, 2007 redemption. The holders of all series of Preferred Stock may combine to elect two additional directors if the Company fails to make dividend payments for six quarterly dividend payment periods, whether or not consecutive.

Redemption of Partnership Interests: Subject to certain limitations described below, each limited partner (other than the Company and holders of preferred units) has the right to require the redemption of such limited partner’sunits. This right may be exercised on at least 10 days notice at any time or from time to time, beginning on the date that is one year after the date on which such limited partner is admitted to the Operating Partnership (unless otherwise contractually agreed by the general partner).

Unless the Company, as general partner, elects to assume and perform the Operating Partnership’s obligation with respect to a redemption right, as described below, a limited partner that exercises its redemption right will receive cash from the Operating Partnership in an amount equal to the “redemption amount” (as defined in the tOperating Partnership Agreement generally to reflect the average trading price of the common stock of the Company over a specified 10 day trading period) for the units redeemed. In lieu of the Operating Partnershipredeeming the units for cash, the Company, as the general partner, has the right to elect to acquire the units directly ttfrom a limited partner exercising its redemption right, in exchange for cash in the amount specified above as the“redemption amount” or by issuance of the “shares amount” (as defined in the Operating Partnership Agreement, generally to mean the issuance of one share of the Company common stock for each unit of limited partnershipinterest redeemed).

A limited partner cannot exercise its redemption right if delivery of shares of common stock would be prohibited under the articles of incorporation of the Company or if in the opinion of counsel to the general partner there is a significant risk that delivery of shares of common stock would cause the general partner to no longer qualify as a REIT, would cause a violation of the applicable securities or certain antitrust laws, or would result in the Operating Partnership no longer being treated as a partnership for federal income tax purposes.

Limited Partner Transfer Restrictions: Limited partners generally may not transfer partnership interests (other than to their estates, immediate family or certain affiliates) without the prior writteff n consent of the Company asgeneral partner, which consent may be given or withheld in its sole and absolute discretion. The Company, asgeneral partner, has a right of first refusal to purchase partnership interests proposed to be sold by the limitedpartners. Transfers must comply with applicable securities laws and regulations. Transfers of partnership interests generally are not permitted if the transfer would be made through certain trading markets or adversely affect theCompany’s ability to qualify as a REIT or could subject the Company to any additional taxes under Section 857 or Section 4981 of the Code.

6

Management: The Operating Partnership is organized as a California limited partnership. The Company, as the sole general partner of the Operating Partnership, has full, exclusive and complete responsibility and discretion inmanaging and controlling the Operating Partnership, except as provided in the Operating Partnership Agreement and by applicable law. The limited partners of the Operating Partnership have no authority to transact business for, or participate in the management activities or decisions of, the Operating Partnership except as provided in the ffOperating Partnership Agreement and as permitted by applicable law. The Operating Partnership Agreement aaprovides that the general partner may not be removed by the limited partners. In exercising its authority under the agreement, the general partner may take into account (but is not required to do so) the tax consequences to anypartner of actions or inaction and is under no obligation to consider the separate interests of the limited partners.

However, the consent of the limited partners holding a majority of the interests of the limited partners (includinglimited partnership interests held by the Company) generally will be required to amend the Operating Partnership Agreement. Further, the Operating Partnership Agreement cannot be amended without the consent of each partner adversely affected if, among other things, the amendment would alter the partner’s rights to distributions from theOperating Partnership (except as specifically permitted in the Operating Partnership Agreement), alter the redemption right, or impose on the limited partners an obligation to make additional capital contributions.

The consent of all limited partners will be required to (i) take any action that would make it impossible to carry on the ordinary business of the Operating Partnership, except as otherwise provided in the Operating Partnership Agreement; or (ii) possess Operating Partnership property, or assign any rights in specific Operating Partnershipproperty, for other than an Operating Partnership purpose, except as otherwise provided in the Operating PartnershipAgreement. In addition, without the consent of any adversely affected limited partner, the general partner may not perform any act that would subject a limited partner to liability as a general partner in any jurisdiction or any other liability except as provided in the Operating Partnership Agreement or under California law.

Extraordinary Transactions: The Operating Partnership Agreement provides that the Company may not engagein any business combination, defined to mean any merger, consolidation or other combination with or into another person or sale of all or substantially all of its assets, any reclassification, any recapitalization (other than certainstock splits or stock dividends) or change of outstanding shares of common stock, unless (i) the limited partners of the Operating Partnership will receive, or have the opportunity tor receive, the same proportionate consideration per unit in the transaction as shareholders of the Company (without regard to tax considerations); or (ii) limited partnersof the Operating Partnership (other than the general partner) holding at least 60% of the interests in the OperatingPartnership held by limited partners (other than the general partner) vote to approve the business combination. In addition, the Company, as general partner of the Operating Partnership, has agreed in the Operating PartnershipAgreement with the limited partners of the Operating Partnership that it will not consummate a business combination in which the Company conducted a vote of shareholders unless the matter is also submitted to a vote of the partners.

The foregoing provision of the Operating Partnership Agreement would under no circumstances enable or require the Company to engage in a business combination which required the approval of shareholders if the shareholders of the Company did not in fact give the requisite approval. Rather, if the shareholders did approve a business combination, the Company would not consummate the transaction unless the Company as general partner first conducts a vote of partners of the Operating Partnership on the matter. For purposes of the Operating Partnership vote, the Company shall be deemed to vote its partnership interest in the same proportion as theshareholders of the Company voted on the matter (disregarding shareholders who do not vote). The Operating Partnership vote will be deemed approved if the votes recorded are such that if the Operating Partnership vote had been a vote of shareholders, the business combination would have been approved by the shareholders. As a result of these provisions of the Operating Partnership, a third party may be inhibited from making an acquisition proposalfor the Company that it would otherwise make, or the Company, despite having the requisite authority under itsarticles of incorporation, may not be authorized to engage in a proposed business combination.

Indemnification: The Operating Partnership Agreement generally provides that the Company and its officers and directors and the limited partners of the Operating Partnership will be indemnified and held harmless by theOperating Partnership for matters that relate to the operations of the Operating Partnership unless it is established that (i) the act or omission of the indemnified person was material to the matter giving rise to the proceeding and either was committed in bad faith or was the result of active and deliberate dishonesty; (ii) the indemnified person

7

actually received an improper personal benefit in money, property or services; or (iii) in the case of any criminalproceeding, the indemnified person had reasonable cause to believe that the act or omission was unlawful. The termination of any proceeding by judgment, order or settlement does not create a presumption that the indemnified person did not meet the requisite standards of conduct set forth above. The termination of any proceeding by tconviction or upon a plea of nolo contendere or its equivalent, or an entry of an order of probation prior to judgment,creates a rebuttable presumption that the indemnified person did not meet the requisite standard of conduct set forth above. Any indemnification so made shall be made only out of the assets of the Operating Partnership or through tinsurance obtained by the Operating Partnership. The general partner shall not be liable for monetary damages to the partnership, any partners or any assignees for losses sustained, liabilities incurred or benefits not derived as a resultof errors in judgment or of any act or omissions if the general partner acted in good faith.

Duties and Conflicts: The Operating Agreement allows the Company to operate the Operating Partnership in a manner that will enable the Company to satisfy the requirements for being classified as a REIT. The Company intends to conduct all of its business activities, including all activities pertaining to the acquisition, management and operation of properties, through the Operating Partnership. However, the Company may own, directly or through subsidiaries, interests in Operating Partnership properties that do not exceed 1% of the economic interest of any property, and if appropriate for regulatory, tax or other purposes, the Company also may own, directly or through subsidiaries, interests in assets that the Operating Partnership otherwise could acquire, if the Company grants to theOperating Partnership the option to acquire the assets within a period not to exceed three years in exchange for the number of partnership units that would be issued if the Operating Partnership had acquired the assets at the time of acquisition by the Company.

Term: The Operating Partnership will continue in full force and effect until December 31, 2096 or until sooner rdissolved upon the withdrawal of the general partner (unless the limited partners elect to continue the OperatingPartnership), or by the election of the general partner (with the consent of the holders of a majority of the partnerships interests if such vote is held before January 1, 2056), in connection with a merger or the sale or other disposition of all or substantially all of the assets of the Operating Partnership, or by judicial decree.f

Other Provisions: The Operating Partnership Agreement contains other provisions affecting its operations and management, limited partner access to certain business records, responsibility for expenses and reimbursements, tax allocations, distribution of certain reports, winding-up and liquidation, the granting by the limited partners of powersof attorney to the general partner, the rights of holders of particular series of preferred units, and other matters.

Cost Allocation and Administrative Services

Pursuant to a cost sharing and administrative services agreement, the Company shares costs with PSI and affiliated entities for certain administrative services. These services include employee relations, administration, management information systems, legal, corporate tax and office services. Under this agreement, costs are allocated to the Company in accordance with its proportionate share of these costs. These allocated costs totaled $320,000,$335,000 and $327,000 for the years ended December 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004, respectively.

Common Officers and Directors with PSI

Ronald L. Havner, Jr., Chairman of the Company, is the Chief Executive Officer and President of PSI. Harvey Lenkin, retired president of PSI, is a Director of both the Company and PSI. The Company engages additional executive personnel who render services exclusively for the Company. However, it is expected that certain officersof PSI will continue to render services for the Company as requested.

Property Management

The Company continues to manage commercial properties owned by PSI and its affiliates, which are generallyadjacent to mini-warehouses, for a fee of 5% of the gross revenues of such properties in addition to reimbursement of direct costs. The property management contract with PSI is for a seven-year term with the agreement automatically extending for successive one-year terms (unless cancelled by either party). PSI can cancel the property management contract upon 60 days notice while the Operating Partnership can cancel it upon seven years notice. Management fee revenue derived from these management contracts with PSI and its affiliates totaled $625,000,$579,000 and $562,000 for the years ended December 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004, respectively.

8

Management

Joseph D. Russell, Jr. (47) leads the Company’s senior management team. Mr. Russell is President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company. The Company’s executive management includes: John Petersen (43), ExecutivetVice President and Chief Operating Officer; Edward A. Stokx (41), Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer; Brett Franklin (42), Senior Vice President, Acquisitions and Dispositions; Maria R. Hawthorne (47), Senior Vice President (East Coast); Coby Holley (37), Vice President (Pacific Northwest Division), Robin E. Mather (44),Vice President (Southern California Division); William A. McFaul (41), Vice President (Maryland Division); and Viola Sanchez (44) Vice President (Southeast Division).

REIT Structure

If certain detailed conditions imposed by the Code and the related Treasury Regulations are met, an entity, suchas the Company, that invests principally in real estate and that otherwise would be taxed as a corporation may elect to be treated as a REIT. The most important consequence to the Company of being treated as a REIT for federalincome tax purposes is that the Company can deduct dividend distributions (including distributions on preferred stock) to its shareholders, thus effectively eliminating the “double taxation” (at the corporate and shareholder levels) that typically results when a corporation earns income and distributes that income to shareholders in the form of dividends.

The Company believes that it has operated, and intends to continue to operate, in such a manner as to qualify as a REIT under the Code, but no assurance can be given that it will at all times so qualify. To the extent that theCompany continues to qualify as a REIT, it will not be taxed, with certain limited exceptions, on the taxable incomethat is distributed to its shareholders.

Operating Strategy

The Company believes its operating, acquisition and finance strategies combined with its diversified portfolioproduces a lower risk, higher growth business model. The Company’s primary objective is to grow shareholder value. Key elements of the Company’s growth strategy include:

Maximize Net Cash Flow of Existing Properties: The Company seeks to maximize the net cash flow generated by its properties by (i) maximizing average occupancy rates, (ii) achieving higher levels of realized monthly rents per occupied square foot and (iii) reducing its operating cost structure by improving operating efficiencies and economies of scale. The Company believes that its experienced property management personnel and comprehensivesystems combined with increasing economies of scale will enhance the Company’s ability to meet these goals. The Company seeks to increase occupancy rates and realized monthly rents per square foot by providing its field personnel with incentives to lease space to higher credit tenants and to maximize the return on investment in each lease transaction. The Company seeks to reduce its cost structure by controlling capital expenditures associated withre-leasing space by acquiring and owning properties with easily reconfigured space that appeal to a wide range of tenants.

Focus on Targeted Markets: The Company intends to continue investing in markets that have characteristicswhich enable them to be competitive economically. The Company believes that markets with some combination of above average population growth, education levels and personal income will produce better overall economic returns. As of December 31, 2006, substantially all of the Company’s square footage was located in these targeted core markets. The Company targets individual properties in those markets that are close to important services and tuniversities and have easy access to major transportation arteries.

Reduce Expenditures and Increase Occupancy Rates by Providing Flexible Properties and Attracting a Diversified Tenant Base: By focusing on properties with easily reconfigurable space, the Company believes it canffoffer facilities that appeal to a wide range of potential tenants, which aids in reducing the capital expenditures associated with re-leasing space. The Company believes this property flexibility also allows it to better serve existing tenants by accommodating their inevitable expansion and contraction needs. In addition, the Companybelieves that a diversified tenant base and property flexibility helps it maintain high occupancy rates during periods when market demand is weak, by enabling it to attract a greater number of potential users to its space.t

9

Provide Superior Property Management: The Company seeks to provide a superior level of service to its tenants in order to achieve high occupancy and rental rates, as well as minimal customer turnover. The Company’s property management offices are primarily located on-site or regionally located, providing tenants with convenient access to management and helping the Company maintain its properties and convey a sense of quality, order and security. TheCompany has significant experience in acquiring properties managed by others and thereafter improving tenant satisfaction, occupancy levels, renewal rates and rental income by implementing established tenant serviceprograms.

Financing Strategy

The Company’s primary objective in its financing strategy is to maintain financial flexibility and a low risk capital structure using permanent capital to finance its growth. Key elements of this strategy are:

Retain Operating Cash Flow: The Company seeks to retain significant funds (after funding its distributions and capital improvements) for additional investments. During the year ended December 31, 2006, the Company distributed 31.2% of its funds from operations (“FFO”) to common shareholders/unit holders. During the year endedDecember 31, 2005, the Company distributed 33.0% of its FFO to common shareholders/unit holders. The increase in FFO is primarily due to net operating income from acquired properties partially offset by the increase in non-cashdistributions associated with preferred equity redemptions. FFO is computed in accordance with the White Paper on mmFFO approved by the Board of Governors of the National Association of Real Estate Investment Trusts(“NAREIT”). The White Paper defines FFO as net income, computed in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”), before depreciation, amortization, minority interest in income and extraordinary items. FFO is a non-GAAP financial measure and should be analyzed in conjunction with net income. However, FFO should not be viewed as a substitute for net income as a measure of operating performance as it does not reflect depreciation and amortization costs or the level of capital expenditure and leasing costs necessary to maintain theoperating performance of the Company’s properties, which are significant economic costs and could materially impact the Company’s results of operations. Other REITs may use different methods for calculating FFO and, accordingly, the Company’s FFO may not be comparable to other real estate companies’ funds from operations. SeeItem 7, “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Liquidity and Capital Resources — Non-GAAP Supplemental Disclosure Measure: Funds from Operations,” for a reconciliationof FFO and net income allocable to common shareholders and for information on why the Company presents FFO.

Perpetual Preferred Stock/Units: The primary source of leverage in the Company’s capital structure is perpetualpreferred stock or equivalent preferred units in the operating partnership. This method of financing eliminates interest rate and refinancing risks because the dividend rate is fixed and the stated value or capital contribution is not required to be repaid. In addition, the consequences of defaulting on required preferred distributions is less severethan with debt. The preferred shareholders may elect two additional directors if six quarterly distributions go unpaid,whether or not consecutive.

Debt Financing: The Company has used debt financing to a limited degree. The primary source of debt that theCompany relies upon to provide short term capital is its $100.0 million unsecured line of credit with Wells Fargo. In the past, the Company also had an unsecured term loan in the amount of $50.0 million. This term loan was repaid in2004. From time to time, the Company has also borrowed funds on a short term basis from PSI.

Access to Acquisition Capital: The Company seeks to maintain a ratio of FFO to combined fixed charges and preferred distributions paid of 3.0 to 1.0. Fixed charges include interest expense and capitalized interest. Preferred distributions include amounts paid to preferred shareholders and preferred Operating Partnership unit holders. For the year ended December 31, 2006, the FFO to combined fixed charges and preferred distributions paid ratio was 2.9rrto 1.0, excluding the effects of Emerging Issues Task Force (“EITF”) Topic D-42. The fixed charge ratio was belowthe Company’s objective of 3.0x as the Company issued preferred equity in 2006 in anticipation of redeeming higher rate preferred equity in 2006 and early 2007, which resulted in a higher level of preferred distributions. TheCompany believes that its financial position will enable it to access capital to finance its future growth. Subject tomarket conditions, the Company may add leverage to its capital structure. Throughout this Form 10-K, we use the term “preferred equity” to mean both the preferred stock issued by the Company and the preferred partnership units issued by the Operating Partnership and the term “preferred distributions” to mean dividends and distributions on the preferred stock and preferred partnership units.

10

Competition

Competition in the market areas in which many of the Company’s properties are located is significant and hasreduced the occupancy levels and rental rates of, and increased the operating expenses of, certain of these properties. Competition may be accelerated by any increase in availability of funds for investment in real estate. Barriers to entry are relatively low for those with the necessary capital and the Company competes for property acquisitions and tenants with entities that have greater financial resources than the Company. Recent increases in sublease space and unleased developments are expected to further intensify competition among operators in certain market areas in which the Company operates.

The Company’s properties compete for tenants with similar properties located in its markets primarily on the basis of location, rent charged, services provided and the design and condition of improvements. The Company believes it possesses several distinguishing characteristics that enable it to compete effectively in the flex, office and industrial space markets. The Company believes its personnel are among the most experienced in these real estatemarkets. The Company’s facilities are part of a comprehensive system encompassing standardized procedures and integrated reporting and information networks. The Company believes that the significant operating and financialexperience of its executive officers and directors combined with the Company’s capital structure, nationalinvestment scope, geographic diversity and economies of scale should enable the Company to compete effectively.

Investments in Real Estate Facilities

As of December 31, 2006, the Company owned and operated approximately 18.7 million rentable square feet compared to approximately 17.6 million rentable square feet at December 31, 2005. The net increase in rentable square feet was due to the acquisition of approximately 1.2 million square feet to its portfolio, partially offset by thedisposition of facilities that were identified by management as not meeting the Company’s ongoing investment strategy.

Summary of Business Model

The Company has a diversified portfolio. It is diversified geographically in eight states and has a diversified customer mix by size and industry concentration. The Company believes that this diversification combined with aconservative financing strategy, focus on markets with strong demographics for growth and our operating strategy gives the Company a business model that mitigates risk and provides strong long-term growth opportunities. k

Restrictions on Transactions with Affiliates

The Company’s Bylaws provide that the Company may engage in transactions with affiliates provided that a purchase or sale transaction with an affiliate is (i) approved by a majority of the Company’s independent directors and (ii) fair to the Company based on an independent appraisal or fairness opinion.

Borrowings

As of December 31, 2006, the Company had outstanding mortgage notes payable of $67.0 million. See Notes 5aaand 6 to the consolidated financial statements for a summary of the Company’s outstanding borrowings as of uuDecember 31, 2006.

In August of 2005, the Company modified the term of its line of credit (the “Credit Facility”) with Wells FargoBank. The Credit Facility has a borrowing limit of $100.0 million and matures on August 1, 2008. Interest on outstanding borrowings is payable monthly. At the option of the Company, the rate of interest charged is equal to (i)the prime rate or (ii) a rate ranging from the London Interbank Offered Rate (“LIBOR”) plus 0.50% to LIBOR plus 1.20% depending on the Company’s credit ratings and coverage ratios, as defined (currently LIBOR plus 0.65%). Inaddition, the Company is required to pay an annual commitment fee ranging from 0.15% to 0.30% of the borrowing limit (currently 0.20%). In connection with the modification of the Credit Facility, the Company paid a fee of $450,000, which will be amortized over the life of the Credit Facility. The Company had no balance outstanding on its Credit Facility at December 31, 2006 and 2005.m

11

The Credit Facility requires the Company to meet certain covenants including (i) maintain a balance sheet leverage ratio (as defined) of less than 0.45 to 1.00, (ii) maintain interest and fixed charge coverage ratios (as defined) of not less than 2.25 to 1.00 and 1.75 to 1.00, respectively, (iii) maintain a minimum tangible net worth (as defined) and (iv) limit distributions to 95% of funds from operations (as defined) for any four consecutive quarters.In addition, the Company is limited in its ability to incur additional borrowings (the Company is required to maintain unencumbered assets with an aggregate book value equal to or greater than two times the Company’s unsecured recourse debt; the Company did not have any unsecured recourse debt at December 31, 2006) or sell assets. The Company was in compliance with the covenants of the Credit Facility at December 31, 2006.

In February, 2004, the Company repaid, in full, the $50.0 million unsecured term note agreement with Fleet National Bank. The Company incurred interest at LIBOR plus 1.45% per annum. During July, 2002, the Company entered into an interest rate swap transaction which resulted in a fixed LIBOR rate of 3.01% for the term loanresulting in an all in rate of 4.46% per annum on the term loan. The unsecured note required the Company to meet covenants that were substantially the same as the covenants in the Credit Facility.

The Company has broad powers to borrow in furtherance of the Company’s objectives. The Company has incurred in the past, and may incur in the future, both short-term and long-term indebtedness to increase its funds available for investment in real estate, capital expenditures and distributions.

Employees

As of December 31, 2006, the Company employed 144 individuals, primarily personnel engaged in propertyoperations. The Company believes that its relationship with its employees is good and none of the employees are represented by a labor union.

Insurance

The Company believes that its properties are adequately insured. Facilities operated by the Company have historically been covered by comprehensive insurance, including fire, earthquake, liability and extended coveragefrom nationally recognized carriers.

Environmental Matters

Compliance with laws and regulations relating to the protection of the environment, including those regardingthe discharge of material into the environment, has not had any material effects upon the capital expenditures, earnings or competitive position of the Company.

Substantially all of the Company’s properties have been subjected to Phase I environmental reviews. Suchreviews have not revealed, nor is management aware of, any probable or reasonably possible environmental costs that management believes would have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, assets or results of operations, nor is the Company aware of any potentially material environmental liability.

ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS

In addition to the other information in this Form 10-K, the following factors should be considered in evaluating our company and our business.

Public Storage has significant influence over us.

At December 31, 2006, Public Storage and its affiliates owned 25.4% of the outstanding shares of our commonstock and 25.5% of the outstanding common units of our operating partnership (100.0% of the common units not owned by us). Assuming conversion of its partnership units PSI would own 44.5% of the outstanding shares of our common stock. Also, Ronald L. Havner, Jr., our Chairman of the Board, is also Chief Executive Officer, President and a Director of Public Storage and Harvey Lenkin, one of our Directors, is also a Director of Public Storage.Consequently, Public Storage has the ability to significantly influence all matters submitted to a vote of our

12

shareholders, including electing directors, changing our articles of incorporation, dissolving and approving other extraordinary transactions such as mergers, and all matters requiring the consent of the limited partners of theoperating partnership. In addition, Public Storage’s ownership may make it more difficult for another party to acquire us without Public Storage’s approval.

Provisions in our organizational documents may prevent changes in control.

Our articles generally prohibit owning more than 7% of our shares: Our articles of incorporation restrict the number of shares that may be owned by any other person, and the partnership agreement of our operatingpartnership contains an anti-takeover provision. No shareholder (other than Public Storage and certain other specified shareholders) may own more than 7% of the outstanding shares of our common stock, unless our board of directors waives this limitation. We imposed this limitation to avoid, to the extent possible, a concentration of ownership that might jeopardize our ability to qualify as a REIT. This limitation, however, also makes a change of control much more difficult (if not impossible) even if it may be favorable to our public shareholders. Theseprovisions will prevent future takeover attempts not approved by Public Storage even if a majority of our public shareholders consider it to be in their best interests because they would receive a premium for their shares over theshares’ then market value or for other reasons.

Our board can set the terms of certain securities without shareholder approval: Our board of directors isauthorized, without shareholder approval, to issue up to 50.0 million shares of preferred stock and up to 100.0 million shares of Equity Stock, in each case in one or more series. Our board has the right to set the terms of each of these series of stock. Consequently, the board could set the terms of a series of stock that could make it difficult (if not impossible) for another party to take over our company even if it might be favorable to our public shareholders.Our articles of incorporation also contain other provisions that could have the same effect. We can also cause our operating partnership to issue additional interests for cash or in exchange for property.

The partnership agreement of our operating partnership restricts mergers: The partnership agreement of our operating partnership generally provides that we may not merge or engage in a similar transaction unless the limited partners of our operating partnership are entitled to receive the same proportionate payments as our shareholders. In addition, we have agreed not to merge unless the merger would have been approved had the limited partners beenable to vote together with our shareholders, which has the effect of increasing Public Storage’s influence over us dueto Public Storage’s ownership of operating partnership units. These provisions may make it more difficult for us to merge with another entity.

Our operating partnership poses additional risks to us.

Limited partners of our operating partnership, including Public Storage, have the right to vote on certain changesto the partnership agreement. They may vote in a way that is against the interests oft our shareholders. Also, as fgeneral partner of our operating partnership, we are required to protect the interests of the limited partners of theoperating partnership. The interests of the limited partners and of our shareholders may differ.

We would incur adverse tax consequences if we fail to qualify as a REIT.

Our cash flow would be reduced if we fail to qualify as a REIT: While we believe that we have qualified since1990 to be taxed as a REIT, and will continue to be so qualified, we cannot be certain. To continue to qualify as aREIT, we need to satisfy certain requirements under the federal income tax laws relating to our income, assets, distributions to shareholders and shareholder base. In this regard, the share ownership limits in our articles of incorporation do not necessarily ensure that our shareholder base is sufficiently diverse for us to qualify as a REIT.For any year we fail to qualify as a REIT, we would be taxed at regular corporate tax rates on our taxable income unless certain relief provisions apply. Taxes would reduce our cash available for distributions to shareholders or for reinvestment, which could adversely affect us and our shareholders. Also we would not be allowed to elect REITstatus for five years after we fail to qualify unless certain relief provisions apply.

We may need to borrow funds to meet our REIT distribution requirements: To qualify as a REIT, we mustgenerally distribute to our shareholders 90% of our taxable income. Our income consists primarily of our share of our Operating Partnership’s income. We intend to make sufficient distributions to qualify as a REIT and otherwise

13

avoid corporate tax. However, differences in timing between income and expenses and the need to makenondeductible expenditures such as capital improvements and principal payments on debt could force us to borrow funds to make necessary shareholder distributions.

Since we buy and operate real estate, we are subject to general real estate investment and operating risks.

Summary of real estate risks: We own and operate commercial properties and are subject to the risks of owning real estate generally and commercial properties in particular. These risks include:

• the national, state and local economic climate and real estate conditions, such as oversupply of or reduced demand for space and changes in market rental rates;

• how prospective tenants perceive the attractiveness, convenience and safety of our properties;

• difficulties in consummating and financing acquisitions and developments on advantageous terms and the failure of acquisitions and developments to perform as expected;

• our ability to provide adequate management, maintenance and insurance;

• our ability to collect rent from tenants on a timely basis;

• the expense of periodically renovating, repairing and reletting spaces;

• environmental issues;

• compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act and other federal, state, and local laws and regulations;

• increasing operating costs, including real estate taxes, insurance and utilities, if these increased costs cannot be passed through to tenants;

• changes in tax, real estate and zoning laws;

• increase in new commercial properties in our market;

• tenant defaults and bankruptcies;

• tenant’s right to sublease space; and

• concentration of properties leased to non-rated private companies.

Certain significant costs, such as mortgage payments, real estate taxes, insurance and maintenance, generally arenot reduced even when a property’s rental income is reduced. In addition, environmental and tax laws, interest ratelevels, the availability of financing and other factors may affect real estate values and property income. Furthermore, ffthe supply of commercial space fluctuates with market conditions.

If our properties do not generate sufficient income to meet operating expenses, including any debt service, tenantimprovements, leasing commissions and other capital expenditures, we may have to borrow additional amounts to cover fixed costs, and we may have to reduce our distributions to shareholders.

We may be unable to consummate acquisitions and developments on advantageous terms or acquisitions and developments may fail to perform as expected: We continue to seek to acquire and develop flex, industrial and officeproperties where they meet our criteria and we believe that they will enhance our future financial performance and tthe value of our portfolio. Our belief, however, is based on and is subject to risks, uncertainties and other factors,many of which are forward-looking and are uncertain in nature or are beyond our control, including the risks that our acquisitions and developments may not perform as expected, that we may be unable to quickly integrate new acquisitions and developments into our existing operations and that any costs to develop projects or redevelop

14

acquired properties may exceed estimates. Further, we face significant competition for suitable acquisition properties from other real estate investors, including other publicly traded real estate iu nvestment trusts and privateinstitutional investors. As a result, we may be unable to acquire additional properties we desire or the purchase price for desirable properties may be significantly increased. Moreover, some of these properties may have unknown characteristics or deficiencies or may not complement our portfolio of existing properties. In addition, we mayfinance future acquisitions and developments through a combination of borrowings, proceeds from equity or debt offerings by us or the operating partnership, and proceeds from property divestitures. These financing options may not be available when desired or required or may be more costly than anticipated, which could adversely affect our cash flow. Real property development is subject to a number of risks, including construction delays, complications in obtaining necessary zoning, occupancy and other governmental permits, cost overruns, financing risks, and the possible inability to meet expected occupancy and rent levels. If any of these problems occur, development costs for a project may increase, and there may be costs incurred for projects that are not completed. As a result of theforegoing, some properties may be worth less or may generate less revenue than, or simply not perform as well as, we believed at the time of acquisition or development, negatively affecting our operating results. Any of theforegoing risks could adversely affect our financial condition, operating results and cash flow, and our ability to pay dividends on, and the market price of our stock.

We may encounter significant delays and expense in reletting vacant space, or we may not be able to relet space at existing rates, in each case resulting in losses of income: When leases expire, we will incur expenses in retrofitting space and we may not be able to release the space on the same terms. Certain leases provide tenants with the right to terminate early. Our properties as of December 31, 2006 generallyrr have lower vacancy rates than the average for the markets in which they are located, and leases accounting for 18.9% of our annual rental income expire in 2007. While we have estimated our cost of renewing leases that expire in 2007, our estimates could bewrong. If we are unable to release space promptly, if the terms are significantly less favorable than anticipated or if the costs are higher, we may have to reduce our distributions to shareholders.

Tenant defaults and bankruptcies may reduce our cash flow and distributions: We may have difficulty incollecting from tenants in default, particularly if they declare bankruptcy. This could affect our cash flow and distributions to shareholders. Since many of our tenants are non-rated private companies, this risk may be enhanced. Subsequent to December 31, 2006, a tenant occupying approximatelaa y 134,000 square feet defaulted on its lease. The Company is currently pursuing legal action against the tenant and is uncertain of the outcome. While the Companyhistorically has experienced a low level of write-offs due to bankruptcy, there is inherent uncertainty in a tenant’s ability to continue paying rent if they are in bankruptcy. As of December 31y , 2006, the Company had approximately18,000 square feet occupied by a tenant protected by Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code. Given the historical uncertainty of a tenant’s ability to meet its lease obligations, we will continue to reserve any income that would havebeen realized on a straight line basis. From time to time, tenants have contacted us, requesting early termination of their lease, reduction in space under lease, rent deferment or abatement. At this time, the Company cannot anticipate what impact, if any, the ultimate outcome of these discussions will have on our operating results.

We may be adversely affected by significant competition among commercial properties: Many other commercial properties compete with our properties for tenants. Some of the competing properties may be newer and better located than our properties. We also expect that new properties will be built in our markets. Also, we compete with other buyers, many of which are larger than us, for attractive commercial properties. Therefore, we may not be able to grow as rapidly as we would like.

We may be adversely affected if casualties to our properties are not covered by insurance: We carry insuranceon our properties that we believe is comparable to the insurance carried by other operators for similar properties. However, we could suffer uninsured losses or losses in excess of policy limits for such occurrences such as earthquakes that adversely affect us or even result in loss of the property. We might still remain liable on anymortgage debt or other unsatisfied obligations related to that property.

The illiquidity of our real estate investments may prevent us from adjusting our portfolio to respond to market changes: There may be delays and difficulties in selling real estate. Therefore, we cannot easily change our portfolio when economic conditions change. Also, tax laws limit a REIT’s ability to sell properties held for less than four years.

15

We may be adversely affected by changes in laws: Increases in income and service taxes may reduce our cashflow and ability to make expected distributions to our shareholders. Our properties are also subject to various federal, state and local regulatory requirements, such as state and local fire and safety codes. If we fail to comply with these requirements, governmental authorities could fine us or courts could award damages against us. Webelieve our properties comply with all significant legal requirements. However, these requirements could change in a way that would reduce our cash flow and ability to make distributions to shareholders.

We may incur significant environmental remediation costs: Under various federal, state and local environmentallaws, an owner or operator of real estate may have to clean spills or other releases of hazardous or toxic substances fon or from a property. Certain environmental laws impose liability whether or not the owner knew of, or wasresponsible for, the presence of the hazardous or toxic substances. In some cases, liability may exceed the value of the property. The presence of toxic substances, or the failure to properly remedy any resulting contamination, maymake it more difficult for the owner or operator to sell, lease or operate its property or to borrow money using its property as collateral. Future environmental laws may impose additional material liabilities on us.

We are affected by the Americans with Disabilities Act.

The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 requires that access and use by disabled persons of all public faccommodations and commercial properties be facilitated. Existing commercial properties must be made accessible to disabled persons. While we have not estimated the cost of complying with this act, we do not believe the cost willbe material. We have an ongoing program to bring our properties into what we believe is compliance with theAmericans with Disabilities Act.

We depend on external sources of capital to grow our company.

We are generally required under the Internal Revenue Code to distribute at least 90% of our taxable income. Because of this distribution requirement, we may not be able to fund future capital needs, including any necessarybuilding and tenant improvements, from operating cash flow. Consequently, we may need to rely on third-party sources of capital to fund our capital needs. We may not be able to obtain the financing on favorable terms or at all. Access to third-party sources of capital depends, in part, on general market conditions, the market’s perception of our growth potential, our current and expected future earnings, our cash flow, and the market price per share of our common stock. If we cannot obtain capital from third-party sources, we may not be able to acquire properties whenstrategic opportunities exist, satisfy any debt service obligations, or make cash distributions to shareholders.

Our ability to control our properties may be adversely affected by ownership through partnerships and joint ventures.

We own most of our properties through our operating partnership. Our organizational documents do not prevent us from acquiring properties with others through partnerships or joint ventures. This type of investment may present additional risks. For example, our partners may have interests that differ from ours or that conflict with ours, or our partners may become bankrupt. During 2001, we entered into a joint venture arrangement that held property subject to debt. This joint venture has been liquidated and all debts paid; however, we may enter into similar arrangements with the same partner or other partners.

We can change our business policies and increase our level of debt without shareholder approval.

Our board of directors establishes our investment, financing, distribution and our other business policies and maychange these policies without shareholder approval. Our organizational documents do not limit our level of debt. Achange in our policies or an increase in our level of debt could adversely affect our operations or the price of our common stock.

We can issue additional securities without shareholder approval.

We can issue preferred equity, common stock and equity stock without shareholder approval. Holders of preferred stock have priority over holders of common stock, and the issuance of additional shares of stock reducesthe interest of existing holders in our company.

16

Increases in interest rates may adversely affect the market price of our common stock.

One of the factors that influences the market price of our common stock is the annual rate of distributions that we pay on our common stock, as compared with interest rates. An increase in interest rates may lead purchasers of REIT shares to demand higher annual distribution rates, which could adversely affect the market price of our common stock.

Shares that become available for future sale may adversely affect the market price of our common stock.

Substantial sales of our common stock, or the perception that substantial sales may occur, could adversely affect the market price of our common stock. As of December 31, 2006, Public Storage owned 25.4% of the outstandingshares of our common stock (44.5% upon conversion of its interest in our operating partnership). These shares, as well as shares of common stock held by certain other significant shareholders, are eligible to be sold in the publicmarket, subject to compliance with applicable securities laws.

We depend on key personnel.

We depend on our key personnel, including Ronald L. Havner, Jr., our Chairman of the Board, and Joseph D.Russell, Jr., our President and Chief Executive Officer. The loss of Mr. Havner, Mr. Russell, or other key personnelcould adversely affect our operations. We maintain no key person insurance on our key personnel.

Terrorist attacks and the possibility of wider armed conflict may have an adverse impact on our business andoperating results and could decrease the value of our assets.

Terrorist attacks and other acts of violence or war, such as those that took place on September 11, 2001, could have a material adverse impact on our business and operating results. There can be no assurance that there will not be further terrorist attacks against the United States or its businesses or interests. Attacks or armed conflicts that directly impact one or more of our properties could significantly affect our ability to operate those properties and thereby impair our operating results. Further, we may not have insurance coverage for all losses caused by a terrorist aaattack. Such insurance may not be available, or if it is available and we decide to obtain such terrorist coverage, the cost for the insurance may be significant in relationship to the risk overall. In addition, the adverse effects that suchviolent acts and threats of future attacks could have on the U.S. economy could similarly have a material adverseeffect on our business and results of operations. Finally, further terrorist acts could cause the United States to enter into a wider armed conflict which could further impact our business and operating results.

Change in taxation of corporate dividends may adversely affect the value of our shares.

The Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003, enacted on May 28, 2003, generally reduces to 15% the maximum marginal rate of federal tax payable by individuals on dividends received from a regular Ccorporation. This reduced tax rate, however, does not apply to dividends paid to individuals by a REIT on its shares except for certain limited amounts. The earnings of a REIT that are distributed to its shareholders are still generallysubject to less federal income taxation on an aggregate basis than earnings of a non-REIT C corporation that aredistributed to its shareholders net of corporate-level income tax. The Jobs and Growth Tax Act, however, could cause individual investors to view stocks of regular C corporations as more attractive relative to shares of REITs than was the case prior to the enactment of the legislation because the dividet nds from regular C corporations, which previously were taxed at the same rate as REIT dividends, are now taxed at a maximum marginal rate of 15% while REIT dividends are taxed at a maximum marginal rate of 35%. We cannot estimate f what effect, if any, theenactment of this legislation has had on the value of our common stock, either in terms of price or relative to other investments.

ITEM 1B. UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS

None.

17

ITEM 2. PROPERTIES

As of December 31, 2006, the Company owned approximately 11.5 million square feet of flex space, 3.9 million square feet of industrial space and 3.3 million square feet of office space concentrated primarily in nine markets consisting of Southern and Northern California, Southern and Northern Texas, South Florida, Virginia, Maryland,Oregon and Arizona. The weighted average occupancy rate throughout 2006 was 93.4% and the average realized rental revenue per square foot was $14.37.

The following table contains information about all properties owned by the Company as of December 31, 2006 and the weighted average occupancy rates throughout 2006 (except as set forth below, all of the properties are held in fee simple interest) (in thousands):

Weighted Rentable Square Footage Average Location Flex Industrial Office Total Occupancy RateArizonaMesa ........................................................................... 78 — — 78 85.8%Phoenix ....................................................................... 310 — — 310 95.1%Tempe......................................................................... 291 — —— 291— 94.9% 679 — —— 679— 94.0% Northern CaliforniaHayward ..................................................................... — 407 — 407 91.4%Monterey..................................................................... — — 12 12 100.0%Sacramento ................................................................. — — 367 367 95.4% San Jose ...................................................................... 457 — — 457 94.0% San Ramon.................................................................. — — 52 52 99.2%Santa Clara.................................................................. 178 — — 178 100.0%So. San Francisco ....................................................... 94 — —— 94— 94.5% 729 407 431 1,567 94.6%

Southern CaliforniaBuena Park.................................................................. — 317 — 317 99.1% Carson......................................................................... 77 — — 77 95.2%Cerritos ....................................................................... — 395 31 426 97.6%Culver City ................................................................. 146 — — 146 98.0%Irvine .......................................................................... — — 160 160 97.2% Laguna Hills ............................................................... 614 — — 614 97.1%Lake Forest ................................................................. 297 — — 297 95.8%Monterey Park ............................................................ 199 — — 199 95.0%Orange ........................................................................ — — 108 108 90.7% San Diego (2).............................................................. 768 — — 768 95.7%Santa Ana.................................................................... — — 437 437 92.3% Signal Hill................................................................... 267 — — 267 95.0% Studio City.................................................................. 22 — — 22 100.0%Torrance...................................................................... 147 — —— 147— 97.2% 2,537 712 736 3,985 96.0% Maryland Beltsville..................................................................... 309 — — 309 98.5%Gaithersburg ............................................................... — — 29 29 90.6%Rockville..................................................................... 212 — 688 900 97.2% Silver Spring (2) ......................................................... 366 — 166— 532 95.1% 887 — 883— 1,770 96.8% OregonBeaverton.................................................................... 1,024 — 188 1,212 90.9% Milwaukee .................................................................. 102 — —— 102— 82.3% 1,126 — 188— 1,314 90.2%

18

Weighted Rentable Square Footage Average Location Flex Industrial Office Total Occupancy RateNorthern TexasDallas.......................................................................... 237 — — 237 82.9%Farmers Branch .......................................................... 112 — — 112 85.2% Garland ....................................................................... 36 — — 36 58.6% Irving (1)..................................................................... 715 231 — 946 83.0% Mesquite ..................................................................... 57 — — 57 84.1%Plano........................................................................... 184 — — 184 61.9%Richardson.................................................................. 117 — —— 117— 81.8% 1,458 231 — 1,689— 80.3% Southern TexasAustin ......................................................................... 787 — — 787 89.6%Houston ...................................................................... 177 — 131 308 88.2% Missouri City .............................................................. 66 — —— 66— 95.0% 1,030 — 131— 1,161 89.5% South FloridaBoca Raton (2)............................................................ 135 — — 135 94.8%Miami ......................................................................... 631 2,556 12 3,199 96.4% Wellington (2) ............................................................ 262 — —— 262— 97.9% 1,028 2,556 12 3,596 96.4% VirginiaAlexandria .................................................................. 155 — 54 209 97.6%Chantilly (2)................................................................ 563 — 38 601 91.5%Fairfax ........................................................................ — — 166 166 91.2% Herndon ...................................................................... — — 244 244 97.2% Lorton ......................................................................... 246 — — 246 98.9% Merrifield.................................................................... 303 — 355 658 91.5% Springfield .................................................................. 270 — 90 360 99.7%Sterling ....................................................................... 296 — — 296 93.5%Woodbridge ................................................................ 114 — —— 114— 98.5% 1,947 — 947— 2,894 94.6% Washington Renton ........................................................................ 28 — —— 28— 76.5% 28 — —— 28— 76.5% Totals .......................................................................... 11,449 3,906 3,328 18,683 93.4% ____________

(1) The Company owns one property that is subject to a ground lease in Las Colinas, Texas.

(2) Five commercial properties, one in San Diego, California, two in Chantilly, Virginia, one in Silver Spring, Maryland, one in Boca Raton, Florida, and two in Wellington, Florida, serve as collateral to mortgage notes payable. For more information, see Note 6 of the Consolidated Financial Statements.

We currently anticipate that each of these properties will continue to be used for its current purpose. Competitionexists in each of the market areas in which these properties are located. Significant amounts of capital appear to beavailable to fund potential buyers of commercial real estate and the Company may be competing for properties and tenants with entities that have greater financial resources than the Company. For information regarding generalcompetitive conditions to which the Company’s properties are or may be subject, see “Management’s Discussionand Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Overview — Effect of Economic Conditions onthe Company’s Primary Markets.”

The Company has no present plans for any material renovation, improvement or development of its properties. The Company typically renovates its properties in connection with the re-leasing of space to tenants and expects that it will pay the costs of such renovations from rental income. The Company has risks that tenants will default on leases and declare bankruptcy. Management believes these risks are mitigated through the Company’s geographicdiversity and diverse tenant base.

19

The

Com

pany

eva

luat

es th

e pe

rfor

man

ce o

f its

pro

perti

es p

rimar

ily b

ased

on

net o

pera

ting

inco

me

(“N

OI”

). N

OI i

s def

ined

by

the

Com

pany

as r

enta

l inc

ome

as d

efin

ed b

y G

AA

P le

ss c

ost o

f ope

ratio

ns a

s def

ined

by

GA

AP.

See

“Man

agem

ent’s

Dis

cuss

ion

and

Ana

lysi

s of F

inan

cial

Con

ditio

n an

d R

esul

ts o

f Ope

ratio

ns—

Ove

rvie

w —

Con

cent

ratio

n of

Por

tfolio

by

Reg

ion”

bel

ow fo

r mor

e in

form

atio

n on

NO

I,in

clud

ing

why

the

Com

pany

pre

sent

s N

OI a

nd h

ow th

e C

ompa

ny

uses

NO

I. Th

e fo

llow

ing

info

rmat

ion

illus

trate

s ren

tal i

ncom

e, c

ost o

f ope

ratio

ns a

nd N

OI g

ener

ated

by

the

Com

pany

’s to

tal p

ort

tfo

lio in

200

6, 2

005

and

2004

by

geog

raph

ic re

gion

and

by

prop

erty

cla

ssifi

catio

ns. A

s a re

sult

of a

cqui

sitio

ns a

nd d

ispo

sitio

ns, c

erta

in p

rope

rties

wer

e no

t hel

d fo

r the

full

year

.

T he

Com

pany

’s c

alcu

latio

n of

NO

I may

not

be

com

para

ble

to th

ose

of o

ther

com

pani

es a

nd s

hmm

ould

not

be

used

as

an a

ltern

ativ

e to

mea

sure

s of

per

form

ance

in a

ccor

danc

e w

ith g

ener

ally

acc

epte

d ac

coun

ting

prin

cipl

es. T

he ta

bles

bel

ow a

lso

incl

ude

a re

conc

iliat

ion

of N

OI t

o th

e m

ost c

ompa

rabl

e am

ount

s ba

sed

onG

AA

P (in

thou

sand

s):

For

the

Yea

r E

nded

Dec

embe

r 31

, 200

6

Fo

r th

e Y

ear

End

ed D

ecem

ber

31, 2

005

For

the

Yea

r E

nded

Dec

embe

r 31

, 200

4 Fl

ex

Off

ice

Ind

ustr

ial

T

otal

Flex

O

ffic

e

Ind

ustr

ial

Tot

al

Fl

ex

Off

ice

I

ndus

tria

l

Tot

alR

enta

l Inc

ome:

Sout

hern

Cal

iforn

ia...

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

.....

$ 41

,077

$

15,0

20$

5,13

0 $

61,2

27

$ 36

,093

$

13,7

48

$4,

878

$ 54

,719

$

33,6

05

$

13,0

62 $

5,

129

$ 51

,796

N

orth

ern

Cal

iforn

ia...

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

.....

9,

743

6,

805

2,

475

19

,023

9,42

7

6,50

5

3,03

9

18,9

71

10

,576

6,13

1

2,78

6 19

,493

Sout

hern

Tex

as...

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

8,27

1

2,20

1

—

10

,472

7,90

6

1,70

9

—

9,

615

7,

971

1,

682

—

9,65

3 N

orth

ern

Texa

s....

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

.....

13

,643

—

1,

093

14

,736

14,5

85

—

1,12

7

15,7

12

13

,209

—

95

3

14,1

62

Sout

h Fl

orid

a....

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

..

6,25

6

198

18

,219

24,6

73

5,

786

18

5

16,1

09

22,0

80

5,

293

15

9

14,8

34

20,2

86V

irgin

ia...

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

30,3

61

20

,442

—

50

,803

28,8

04

19

,895

—

48

,699

35,3

12

10

,813

—

46

,125

Mar

ylan

d...

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

...

15,7

63

19

,656

—

35

,419

7,57

6

16,6

13

—

24,1

89

6,82

3

17,5

98

—

24

,421

Ore

gon.

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

...

15,7

95

3,

065

—

18,8

60

15

,878

2,80

5

—

18

,683

15,0

93

3,

320

—

18,4

13

Oth

er...

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

....

7,

001

—

——

7,00

1—

6,93

6

—

—

—

6,

936

—

6,58

8

—

——

6,58

8—

147,

910

67

,387

26,9

17

24

2,21

4

132,

991

61

,460

25,1

53

21

9,60

4

134,

470

52

,765

23

,702

210,

937

Cos

t of O

pera

tions

:So

uthe

rn C

alifo

rnia

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

.. 10

,416

6,16

3

1,01

2

17,5

91

8,

142

5,

881

97

4

14,9

97

7,

807

5,

422

92

2

14,1

51N

orth

ern

Cal

iforn

ia...

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

.....

2,

236

2,

150

65

7

5,04

3

1,96

9

2,00

5

609

4,

583

2,

025

1,

983

568

4,

576

Sout

hern

Tex

as...

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

3,64

9

1,01

9

—

4,

668

3,

182

93

3

—

4,

115

3,

314

87

5

—

4,

189

Nor

ther

n Te

xas.

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

..

5,55

0

—

26

1

5,81

1

5,07

6

—

26

1

5,33

7

5,19

7

—

26

9

5,46

6 So

uth

Flor

ida.

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

.....

2,

070

94

6,00

8 8,

172

1,

996

82

5,68

9

7,76

7

1,70

8

74

5,

408

7,

190

Virg

inia

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

...

7,

310

6,

976

—

14

,286

7,17

6

6,70

5

—

13

,881

9,

172

3,

733

—

12

,905

Mar

ylan

d...

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

...

4,

129

5,

824

—

9,95

3

1,70

3

4,78

7

—

6,

490

1,

546

4,

716

—

6,26

2O

rego

n....

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

5,10

1

1,30

0

—

6,

401

4,

667

1,

216

—

5,88

3

4,26

5

1,23

2

—

5,

497

Oth

er...

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

....

2,74

6

—

—

—

2,

746

—

2,

659

—

——

2,65

9—

2,

758

—

—

—

2,

758

—43

,207

23,5

26

7,

938

74

,671

36,5

70

21,6

09

7,

533

65

,712

37

,792

18,0

35

7,16

7

62,9

94N

OI:

Sout

hern

Cal

iforn

ia...

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

.....

30

,661

8,85

7

4,11

8

43,6

36

27

,951

7,86

7

3,90

4

39,7

22

25

,798

7,64

0

4,20

7 37

,645

N

orth

ern

Cal

iforn

ia...

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

.....

7,

507

4,

655

1,

818

13

,980

7,45

8

4,50

0

2,43

0

14,3

88

8,55

1

4,14

8

2,21

8 14

,917

So

uthe

rn T

exas

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

...

4,

622

1,

182

—

5,80

4

4,72

4

776

—

5,50

0

4,65

7

807

—

5,46

4N

orth

ern

Texa

s....

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

.....

8,

093

—

832

8,

925

9,

509

—

866

10

,375

8,01

2

—

68

4

8,69

6 So

uth

Flor

ida.

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

.....

4 ,

186

10

4

12,2

11

16

,501

3,79

0

103

10

,420

14,3

13

3,

585

85

9,42

6

13,0

96

Virg

inia

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

...

23

,051

13,4

66

—

36,5

17

21

,628

13,1

90

—

34,8

18

26

,140

7,08

0

—

33

,220

M

aryl

and

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

11,6

34

13

,832

—

25

,466

5,

873

11

,826

—

17

,699

5,27

7

12,8

82

—

18,1

59

Ore

gon.

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

...

10

,694

1,76

5

—

12

,459

11,2

11

1,

589

—

12,8

00

10

,828

2,08

8

—

12,9

16

Oth

er...

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

....

4,

255

—

——

4,25

5—

4,27

7

—

—

—

4,

277

—

3,83

0

—

——

3,83

0—

$10

4,70

3 $

43

,861

$

18

,979

$

167,

543

$ 96

,421

$

39,8

51

$

17,6

20

$ 15

3,89

2$

96,6

78

$

34,7

30 $

16

,535

$

147,

943

20

The following table is provided to reconcile NOI to consolidated income from continuing operations beforeminority interests as determined by GAAP (in thousands):

For the Years Ended December 31, 2006 2005 2004Property net operating income ................................................ $ 167,543 $ 153,892 $ 147,943Facility management fees........................................................ 625 579 624ffInterest and other income ........................................................ 6,874 4,888 406Depreciation and amortization ................................................ (86,216) (76,178) (69,942)General and administrative ..................................................... (7,046) (5,843) (4,628) Interest expense....................................................................... (2,575) (1,330) (3,054) Asset impairment due to casualty loss .................................... — (72— ) —Income from continuing operations

before minority interests...................................................... $ 79,205 $ 75,936 $ 71,349

Significant Properties

As of and for the year ended December 31, 2006, one of the Company’s properties haf d a book value of morethan 10% of the Company’s total assets. The property, known as Miami International Commerce Center (“MICC”),is a business park in Miami, Florida, consisting of 46 buildings (3.2 million square feet) consisting of flex (631,000square feet), industrial (2.6 million square feet), and office (12,000 square feet) space. The property was purchasedon December 30, 2003 and has a net book value of $178.2 million, representing approximately 12.2% of the Company’s total assets at December 31, 2006.

During 2006, the Company sold 32,400 square feet located at MICC for a combined saled s price of $3.7 million.

MICC property taxes for the year ended December 31, 2006 were $3.3 million at a rate of 2.1% of the respectiveparcel value.

The following table sets forth information with respect to occupancy and rental rates at Miami InternationalCommerce Center for each of the last five years, including a 56,000 square foot retail center and 94,000 square feet of flex space disposed of:

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006Weighted average occupancy rate ................ 86.3% 81.7% 83.8% 91.8% 96.4% Realized rent per square foot ........................ $ 6.96 $ 7.12 $ 7.75 $ 7.47 $ 7.88

There is no one tenant that occupies ten percent or more of the rentable square footage at Miami International Commerce Center.

The following table sets forth information with respect to lease expirations at Miami International CommerceCenter (in thousands, except number of leases expiring):

Year of Lease Expiration Number of Leases Expiring

Rentable Square Footage Subject to

Expiring Leases

Annual Base Rents Under Expiring Leases

Percentage of Total Annual Base Rents Represented by Expiring Leases

2007 ............................... 74 552 $ 4,836 17.7%2008 ............................... 92 832 6,754 24.8%2009 ............................... 97 710 6,259 23.0%2010 ............................... 49 587 4,694 17.2%2011 ............................... 29 327 3,172 11.6%Thereafter....................... 17 156 1,558 5.7%Total ............................... 358 3,164 $ 27,273 100.0%

21

The following table sets forth information with respect to tax depreciation at Miami International CommerceCenter (in thousands, except year data):

Tax Basis Rate of

Depreciation Method Life In Years

Accumulated Depreciation

Land Improvements..................... $ 45,588 8.0% MACRS, 150% 15 $ 12,936Improvements .............................. 24,541 14.0% VARIOUS 5 19,670 Tenant Buildings.......................... 87,365 2.6% MACRS, SL VAR 7,292Total............................................. $ 157,494 $ 39,898

Accumulated depreciation for personal property shown in the preceding table was derived using the mid-quarter convention.

Portfolio Information

Approximately 60.3% of the Company’s annual rents are derived from large tenants, which consist of tenants with leases averaging greater than or equal to 5,000 square feet. These tenants generally sign longer leases, mayrrequire more generous tenant improvements, are typically represented by a broker and are more creditworthy tenants. The remaining 39.7% of the Company’s annual rents are derived from small tenants with average spacerequirements of less than 5,000 square feet and a shorter lease term duration. Tenant improvements are relatively less for these tenants and most of these tenants are not represented by brokers and therefore the Company does not pay lease commissions. The following tables set forth the lease expirations for the entire portfolio of properties owned as of December 31, 2006 in addition to bifurcating the lease expirations for properties serving primarily small businesses and those properties serving primarily larger businesses (in thousands):

Lease Expirations (Entire Portfolio) as of December 31, 2006

Year of Lease Expiration

Rentable Square Footage Subject to Expiring Leases

Annual Base Rents Under Expiring

Leases

Percentage of Total Annual Base Rents Represented by Expiring Leases

2007 .............................................................. 3,604 $ 50,872 18.9% 2008 .............................................................. 4,182 62,817 23.4% 2009 .............................................................. 3,297 45,670 17.0% 2010 .............................................................. 2,216 32,964 12.2% 2011 .............................................................. 1,694 30,022 11.2% Thereafter...................................................... 2,527 46,605 17.3%Total .............................................................. 17,520 $ 268,950 100.0%

Lease Expirations (Small Tenant Portfolio) as of December 31, 2006

The Company’s small tenant portfolio consists of properties with average leases less than 5,000 square feet.

Year of Lease Expiration

Rentable SquareFootage Subject to

Expiring Leases

Annual Base RentsUnder Expiring

Leases

Percentage of Small Tenant Annual

Base Rents Represented by Expiring Leases

2007............................................................... 2,050 $ 30,136 11.2% 2008............................................................... 1,785 29,044 10.8%2009............................................................... 1,200 20,242 7.5% 2010............................................................... 567 10,527 3.9% 2011............................................................... 377 7,247 2.7%Thereafter ...................................................... 442 9,864 3.6%Total .............................................................. 6,421 $ 107,060 39.7%

22

Lease Expirations (Large Tenant Portfolio) as of December 31, 2006

The Company’s large tenant portfolio consists of properties with leases averaging greater than or equal to 5,000square feet.

Year of Lease Expiration

Rentable Square Footage Subject to Expiring Leases

Annual Base Rents Under Expiring Leases

Percentage of Large Tenant Annual

Base Rents Represented by Expiring Leases

2007.............................................................. 1,554 $ 20,736 7.7% 2008.............................................................. 2,397 33,773 12.6% 2009.............................................................. 2,097 25,428 9.5%2010.............................................................. 1,649 22,437 8.3%2011.............................................................. 1,317 22,775 8.5%Thereafter ..................................................... 2,085 36,741 13.7%Total ............................................................. 11,099 $ 161,890 60.3%

ITEM 3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

We are not presently subject to material litigation nor, to our knowledge, is any material litigation threatened against us, other than routine actions for negligence and other claims and administrative proceedings arising in the ordinary course of business, some of which are expected to be covered by liability insurance or third party indemnifications and all of which collectively we do not expect to have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations, or liquidity.

ITEM 4. SUBMISSION OF MATTERS TO A VOTE OF SECURITY HOLDERS

The Company did not submit any matter to a vote of security holders in the fourth quarter of the fiscal year ended December 31, 2006.

ITEM 4A. EXECUTIVE OFFICERS OF THE REGISTRANT

The following is a biographical summary of the executive officerf s of the Company:

Joseph D. Russell, Jr., age 47, has been President since September, 2002 and was named Chief Executive Officer and elected as a Director in August, 2003. Mr. Russell joined Spieker Partners in 1990 and became an officer of Spieker Properties when it went public as a REIT in 1993. Prior to its merger with Equity Office Properties (“EOP”) in 2001, Mr. Russell was President of Spieker Properties’ Silicon Valley Region from 1999 to 2001. Mr. Russellearned a Bachelor of Science degree from the University of Southern California and a Masters of Business Administration from the Harvard Business School. Prior to entering the commercial real estate business, Mr. Russellspent approximately six years with IBM in various marketing positions. Mr. Russell has been a member and past President of the National Association of Industrial and Office Parks, Silicon Valley Chapter.

John Petersen, age 43, has been Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer since he joined theCompany in December, 2004. Prior to joining the Company, Mr. Petersen was Senior Vice President, San Jose Region, for Equity Office Properties from July, 2001 to December, 2004, responsible for 11.3 million square feet of multi-tenant office, industrial and R&D space in Silicon Valley. Prior to EOP, Mr. Petersen was Senior VicePresident with Spieker Properties, from 1995 to 2001 overseeing the growth of that company’s portfolio in San Jose,through acquisition and development of nearly three million square feet. Mr. Petersen is a graduate of The Colorado College in Colorado Springs, Colorado, and was recently the President of National Association of Industrial and Office Parks, Silicon Valley Chapter.

Edward A. Stokx, age 41, a certified public accountant, has been Chief Financial Officer and Secretary of the Company since December, 2003 and Executive Vice President since March, 2004. Mr. Stokx has overallresponsibility for the Company’s finance and accounting functions. In addition, he has responsibility for executingthe Company’s financial initiatives. Mr. Stokx joined Center Trust, a developer, owner, and operator of retail shopping centers in 1997. Prior to his promotion to Chief Financial Officer and Secretary in 2001 he served as

23

Senior Vice President, Finance and Controller. After Center Trust’s merger in January, 2003 with another public REIT, Mr. Stokx provided consulting services to various entities. Prior to joining Center Trust, Mr. Stokx was with Deloitte and Touche from 1989 to 1997, with a focus on real estate clients. Mr. Stokx earned a Bachelor of Sciencedegree in Accounting from Loyola Marymount University.

Brett Franklin, age 43, is Senior Vice President, Acquisitions & Dispositions. Mr Franklin joined the Companyas Vice President of Acquisitions in December, 1997. Since joining the Company, Mr. Franklin has been involved in acquiring over 13.3 million square feet of commercial real estate in Northern and Southern California, Arizona,Texas, Maryland, Virginia, Oregon and Miami. Prior to joining, Mr. Franklin worked for Public Storage Pickup & Delivery as Vice President of Acquisitions from 1996 to 1997. His duties included acquiring and leasing over 1.5million square feet of industrial properties in 16 cities across the country. From 1995 to October, 1996, Mr. Franklinwas a business consultant to San Diego and Los Angeles based real estate firms. From 1992 until 1995, Mr. Franklin held various positions for FORCE, Inc., an environmental remediation and technology company located in Camarillo, California. His positions included Director of Marketing and Chief Operating Officer. From 1987 until 1992, he managed and operated a real estate brokerage company in western Los Angeles. Mr. Franklin received his Bachelor of Science degree from the University of California at Los Angeles. He is a member of the Urban Land Institute.

Maria R. Hawthorne, age 47, was promoted to Senior Vice President of the Company in March, 2004, with responsibility for property operations on the East Coast, which include Northern Virginia, Maryland and Florida. Ms. Hawthorne has been with the Company and its predecessors for eighteen years. From June, 2001 throughMarch, 2004, Ms. Hawthorne was Vice President of the Company, responsible for property operations in Northern Virginia. From July, 1994 to June, 2001, Ms. Hawthorne was a Regional Manager of the Company in Northern Virginia. From August, 1988 to July, 1994, Ms. Hawthorne was the Director of Leasing and Property Manager for American Office Park Properties. Ms. Hawthorne earned a Bachelor of Arts Degree in International Relations fromaaPomona College.

24

PART II

ITEM 5. MARKET FOR REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS ANDYYISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES

a. Market Price of the Registrant’s Common Equity:

The common stock of the Company trades on the American Stock Exchange under the symbol PSB. The following table sets forth the high and low sales prices of the common stock on the American Stock Exchange for the applicable periods:

Range Three Months Ended High LowMarch 31, 2005 .......................................................................................................... $ 45.28 $ 38.18 June 30, 2005 ............................................................................................................. $ 45.61 $ 38.56 September 30, 2005.................................................................................................... $ 47.30 $ 42.51 December 31, 2005 .................................................................................................... $ 49.48 $ 42.60

March 31, 2006 .......................................................................................................... $ 56.68 $ 49.10 June 30, 2006 ............................................................................................................. $ 59.48 $ 50.00 September 30, 2006.................................................................................................... $ 62.80 $ 57.18 December 31, 2006 .................................................................................................... $ 74.75 $ 59.55

As of February 23, 2007, there were 545 holders of record of the common stock.

b. Dividends

Holders of common stock are entitled to receive distributions when, as and if declared by the Company’s Board of Directors out of any funds legally available for that purpose. The Company is required to distribute at least 90% rrof its taxable income prior to the filing of the Company’s tax return to maintain its REIT status for federal incometax purposes. It is management’s intention to pay distributions of not less than these required amounts.

Distributions paid per share of common stock for 2006 and 2005 amounted to $1.16 per year. In 2006, theCompany continued to pay quarterly dividends of $0.29 per common share. The Board of Directors has established a distribution policy to maximize the retention of operating cash flow and distribute the minimum amount required for the Company to maintain its tax status as a REIT. Pursuant to restrictions contained in the Company’s Credit Facility with Wells Fargo Bank, distributions may not exceed 95% of funds from operations, as defined, for any four dconsecutive quarters. For more information on the Credit Facility, see Note 5 to the consolidated financial statements.

c. Issuer Repurchases of Equity Securities:

The Company’s Board of Directors has authorized the repurchase, from time to time, of up to 4.5 million shares of the Company’s common stock on the open market or in privately negotiated transactions. The program does notexpire.

During the last three months of 2006, there were no shares of the Company’s common stock repurchased. As of December 31, 2006, the Company has 1,207,789 shares available for purchase under the program. See Note 9 to the consolidated financial statements for additional information on repurchases and redemptions of equity securities.

d. Securities Authorized for Issuance Under Equity Compensation Plans:

The equity compensation plan information is provided in Item 12.

25

ITEM 6. SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA

The following sets forth selected consolidated and combined financial and operating information on a historicalbasis of the Company. The following information should be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements and notes thereto of the Company included elsewhere in this Form 10-K. Note that historical results from2002 through 2005 were reclassified to conform with 2006 presentation for discontinued operations. See Note 3 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included elsewhere in this Form 10-K for a discussion of incomefrom discontinued operations.

For the Years Ended December 31, 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002

(In thousands, except per share data)Revenues:

Rental income .............................................. $ 242,214 $ 219,604 $ 210,937 $ 186,171 $ 181,836 Facility management fees primarily from

affiliates ..................................................... 625 579 624 742 763Total operating revenues.............................. 242,839 220,183 211,561 186,913 182,599

Expenses: Cost of operations ........................................ 74,671 65,712 62,994 51,536 48,967 Depreciation and amortization..................... 86,216 76,178 69,942 56,179 51,974 General and administrative .......................... 7,046 5,843 4,628 4,683 5,125Total operating expenses.............................. 167,933 147,733 137,564 112,398 106,066

Other income and expenses: Gain on sale of marketable securities........... — — — 2,043 41Interest and other income............................. 6,874 4,888 406 1,125 959 Interest expense ........................................... (2,575) (1,330) (3,054) (4,015) (5,324)Total other income and expenses ................. 4,299 3,558 (2,648) (847) (4,324)

Asset impairment due to casualty loss ........... — 72 — — — Income from continuing operations before

minority interests and equity in income of liquidated joint venture................................ 79,205 75,936 71,349 73,668 72,209

Equity in income of liquidated joint venture......................................................... — — — 2,296 1,978

Minority interests in continuing operations: Minority interest in income — preferred

units: Distributions to preferred unit holders ....... (9,789) (10,350) (17,106) (19,240) (17,927) Redemption of preferred operating

partnership units ...................................... (1,366) (301) (3,139) — — Minority interest in income — common

units ........................................................... (5,113) (5,611) (4,540) (10,398) (10,344)Total minority interests in continuing

operations .................................................. (16,268) (16,262) (24,785) (29,638) (28,271) Income from continuing operations ............... 62,937 59,674 46,564 46,326 45,916Discontinued operations:

Income (loss) from discontinued operations .................................................. (125) 2,769 5,337 6,727 7,290

Impairment charge ....................................... — — — (5,907) (900)Gain on disposition of real estate................. 2,328 18,109 15,462 2,897 9,023 Minority interest in income attributable to

discontinued operations — commonunits ........................................................... (560) (5,258) (5,220) (947) (3,899)

Income from discontinued operations.......... 1,643 15,620 15,579 2,770 11,514Net Income .................................................... 64,580 75,294 62,143 49,096 57,430 Net income allocable to preferred

shareholders: Preferred stock distributions Preferred stock distributions ...................... 44,553 43,011 31,154 15,784 15,412Redemptions of preferred stock ................. 3,380 — 1,866— — ——

Total preferred stock distributions ............... 47,933 43,011 33,020 15,784 15,412Net income allocable to common

shareholders................................................. $ 16,647 $ 32,283 $ 29,123 $ 33,312 $ 42,018

26

For the Years Ended December 31, 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002

(In thousands, except per share data)Per Common Share: Cash Distribution ........................................... $ 1.16 $ 1.16 $ 1.16 $ 1.16 $ 1.16 Net income — Basic ...................................... $ 0.78 $ 1.48 $ 1.34 $ 1.56 $ 1.95 Net income — Diluted................................... $ 0.77 $ 1.47 $ 1.33 $ 1.54 $ 1.93 Weighted average common shares — Basic ............................................ 21,335 21,826 21,767 21,412 21,552 Weighted average common shares — Diluted ......................................... 21,646 22,018 21,960 21,565 21,743 Balance Sheet Data: Total assets .................................................... $ 1,462,864 $ 1,463,678 $ 1,366,052 $ 1,358,861 $ 1,156,802Total debt....................................................... $ 67,048 $ 25,893 $ 11,367 $ 264,694 $ 70,279 Preferred stock called for redemption ............ $ 50,000 $ — $ — $ — $ — Minority interest — preferred units ............... $ 82,750 $ 135,750 $ 127,750 $ 217,750 $ 217,750Minority interest — common units ................ $ 165,469 $ 169,451 $ 169,295 $ 169,888 $ 167,469 Redeemable preferred stock........................... $ 572,500 $ 593,350 $ 510,850 $ 168,673 $ 170,813 Common shareholders’ equity ....................... $ 482,703 $ 500,108 $ 506,114 $ 502,155 $ 493,589Other Data: Net cash provided by operating activities ...... $ 165,515 $ 149,428 $ 151,958 $ 132,410 $ 134,926 Net cash (used in) provided by investing

activities ...................................................... $ (169,986) $ 24,389 $ (26,108) $ (294,885) $ 5,776 Net cash (used in) provided by financing

activities ...................................................... $ (129,694) $ (13,058) $ (91,971) $ 123,472 $ (98,966) Funds from operations (1).............................. $ 106,235 $ 102,463 $ 97,214 $ 97,448 $ 104,543Square footage owned at end of period.......... 18,683 17,555 17,988 18,322 14,426 ____________(1) Funds from operations (“FFO”) is computed in accordance with the White Paper on FFO approved by the Board

of Governors of the National Association of Real Estate Investment Trusts (“NAREIT”). The White Paper defines FFO as net income, computed in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles(“GAAP”), before depreciation, amortization, minority interest in income and extraordinary items. FFO should be analyzed in conjunction with net income. However, FFO should not be viewed as a substitute for net income as a measure of operating performance or liquidity as it does not reflect depreciation and amortization costs or the level of capital expenditure and leasing costs necessary to maintain the operating performance of theCompany’s properties, which are significant economic costs and could materially impact the Company’s results of operations. Other REITs may use different methods for calculating FFO and, accordingly, the Company’sFFO may not be comparable to other real estate companies. See Item 7, “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Liquidity and Capital Resources — Funds from Operations,” for a reconciliation of FFO and net income allocable to common shareholders and for informationon why the Company presents FFO.

ITEM 7. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTSSOF OPERATIONS

The following discussion and analysis of the results of operations and financial condition should be read in conjunction with the selected financial data and the Company’s consolidated financial statements and notes thereto included elsewhere in the Form 10-K.

Forward-Looking Statements: Forward-looking statements are made throughout this Annual Report on Form 10-K. Any statements contained herein that are not statements of historical factt may be deemed to be forward-lookingtstatements. Without limiting the foregoing, the words “may,” “believes,” “anticipates,” “plans,” “expects,” “seeks,” “estimates,” “intends,” and similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements. There are anumber of important factors that could cause the results of the Company to differ materially from those indicated by such forward-looking statements, including those detailed under the heading “Item 1A. Risk Factors.” In light of the significant uncertainties inherent in the forward-looking statements included herein, the inclusion of the information contained in such forward-looking statements should not be regarded as a representation by us or any other personthat our objectives and plans will be achieved. Moreover, we assume no obligation to update these forward-lookingstatements to reflect actual results, changes in assumptions or changes in other factors affecting such forward-looking statements.

27

Overview

As of December 31, 2006, the Company owned and operated 18.7 million rentable square feet of multi-tenant flex, industrial and office properties located in eight states.

The Company focuses on increasing profitability and cash flow aimed at maximizing shareholder value. The Company strives to maintain high occupancy levels while increasing rental rates when market conditions allow. The Company also acquires properties it believes will create long-term value, and disposes of properties which no longer fit within the Company’s strategic objectives or in situations where the Company believes it can optimize cash proceeds. Operating results are driven by income from rental operations and are therefore substantially influencedby rental demand for space within our properties.

In 2006, the Company generally experienced solid and improving commercial real estate conditions throughout its portfolio. Markets experienced steady to improving demand with the Company having a greater ability throughout its portfolio to maintain or improve occupancy while in certain markets the Company raised rentsaggressively. During 2006, the Company still faced rental rate roll downs primarily on leases originally signed at a high market point prior to 2002. As of December 31, 2006, less than 5% of the Company’s leases were executed prior to December 31, 2002.

The Company successfully leased or re-leased 4.8 million square feet of space in 2006 and achieved an overalloccupancy of 93.4% as of December 31, 2006. The Company also continued to experience a trend of decreasing transaction costs from the high levels incurred in 2003 and 2004. Total net operating income increased from the year ended December 31, 2005 to 2006 by $13.7 million or 8.9%. See further discussion of operating results below.

Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates:

Our accounting policies are described in Note 2 to the consolidated financial statements included in this Form 10-K. We believe our most critical accounting policies relate to revenue recognition, allowance for doubtful accounts, impairment of long-lived assets, depreciation, accrual of operating expenses and accruals for contingencies, each of which we discuss below.

Revenue Recognition: We recognize revenue in accordance with Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 104 of the Securities and Exchange Commission, Revenue Recognition in Financial Statements (“SAB 104”). SAB 104 requires that the following four basic criteria must be met before revenue can be recognized: persuasive evidenceof an arrangement exists; the delivery has occurred or services rendered; the fee is fixed and determinable; and collectibility is reasonably assured. All leases are classified as operating leases. Rental income is recognized on adstraight-line basis over the terms of the leases. Straight-line rent is recognized for all tenants with contractual increases in rent that are not included on the Company’s credit watch list. Deferred rent receivables represent rental revenue recognized on a straight-line basis in excess of billed rents. Reimbursements from tenants for realestate taxes and other recoverable operating expenses are recognized as rental income in the period theapplicable costs are incurred.

Property Acquisitions: In accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (“SFAS”) No. 141, Business Combinations, we allocate the purchase price of acquired properties to land, buildings and equipment and identified tangible and intangible assets and liabilities associated with in-place leases (including tenant improvements, unamortized leasing commissions, value of above-market and below-market leases, acquired in-place lease values, and tenant relationships, if any) based on their respective estimated fair values.

The fair value of the tangible assets of the acquired properties considers the value of the properties as if vacant as of the acquisition date. Management must make significant assumptions in determining the value of assets and liabilities acquired. Using different assumptions in the allocation of the purchase cost of the acquired properties would affect the timing of recognition of the related revenue and expenses. Amounts allocated to land are derived from comparable sales of land within the same region. Amounts allocated to buildings and improvements, tenant improvements and unamortized leasing commissions are based on current market replacement costs and other market rate information.

28

The amount allocated to acquired in-place leases is determined based on management’s assessment of current market conditions and the estimated lease-up periods for the respective spaces. The amount allocated to acquired in-place leases is included in deferred leasing costs and other related intangible assets in the balance sheet and amortized as an increase to amortization expense over the remaining non-cancelable term of the respective rleases.

The value allocable to the above or below market component of an acquired in-place lease is determined based upon the present value (using a discount rate which reflects the risks associated with the acquired leases) of the difference between (i) the contractual rents to be paid pursuant to the lease over its remaining term, and (ii) management’s estimate of the rents that would be paid using fair market rental rates over the remaining term of the lease. The amounts allocated to above or below market leases are included in other assets or other liabilities in the balance sheet and are amortized on a straight-line basis as an increase or reduction of rental income over the remaining non-cancelable term of the respective leases.

Allowance for Doubtful Accounts: Rental revenue from our tenants is our principal source of revenue. We monitor the collectibility of our receivable balances including the deferred rent receivable on an on-going basis. Based on these reviews, we maintain an allowance for doubtful accounts for estimated losses resulting from the possible inability of our tenants to make required rent payments to us. Tenant receivables and deferred rent receivables are carried net of the allowances for uncollectible tenant receivables and deferred rent. As discussed below, determination of the adequacy of these allowances requires significant judgments and estimates. Estimate of the required allowance is subject to revision as the factors discussed below change and is sensitive to theeffect of economic and market conditions on our tenants.

Tenant receivables consist primarily of amounts due for contractual lease payments, reimbursements of common area maintenance expenses, property taxes and other expenses recoverable from tenants. Determinationof the adequacy of the allowance for uncollectible current tenant receivables is performed using a methodology that incorporates specific identification, aging analysis, an overall evaluation of the historical loss trends and the fcurrent economic and business environment. The specific identification methodology relies on factors such as the age and nature of the receivables, the payment history and financial condition of the tenant, the assessment of rrthe tenant’s ability to meet its lease obligations, and the status of negotiations of any disputes with the tenant. The allowance also includes a reserve based on historical loss trends not associated with any specific tenant. This reserve as well as the specific identification reserve is reevaluated quarterly based on economic conditions andffthe current business environment.

Deferred rents receivable represents the amount that the cumulative straight-line rental income recorded todate exceeds cash rents billed to date under the lease agreement. Given the longer-term nature of these types of receivables, determination of the adequacy of the allowance for unbilled qq deferred rents receivables is based primarily on historical loss experience. Management evaluates the allowance for unbilled deferred rents treceivable using a specific identification methodology for significant tenants designed to assess their financial condition and ability to meet their lease obligations.

Impairment of Long-Lived Assets: The Company evaluates a property for potential impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that its carrying amount may not be recoverable. On a quarterly basis, the Company evaluates the whole portfolio for impairment based on current operating information. In theevent that these periodic assessments reflect that the carrying amount of a property exceeds the sum of the undiscounted cash flows (excluding interest) that are expected to result from the use and eventual disposition of the property, the Company would recognize an impairment loss to the extent the carrying amount exceeded the testimated fair value of the property. The estimation of expected future net cash flows is inherently uncertain and relies on subjective assumptions dependent upon future and current market conditions and events that affect theultimate value of the property. It requires management to make assumptions related to the property such asfuture rental rates, tenant allowances, operating expenditures, property taxes, capital improvements, occupancylevels, and the estimated proceeds generated from the future sale of the property. These assumptions could differ materially from actual results in future periods. Since SFAS No. 144 provides that the future cash flows used inthis analysis be considered on an undiscounted basis, our historically established intent to hold properties over r

29

the long term directly decreases the likelihood of recording an impairment loss. If our strategy changes or if market conditions otherwise dictate an earlier sale date, an impairment loss could be recognized and such losscould be material.

Depreciation: We compute depreciation on our buildings and equipment using the straight-line method based on estimated useful lives of generally 30 and 5 years. A significant portion of the acquisition cost of each rrproperty is allocated to building and building components. The allocation of the acquisition cost to building and building components, as well as the determination of their useful lives, are based on estimates. If we do not appropriately allocate to these components or we incorrectly estimate the useful lives of these components, our computation of depreciation expense may not appropriately reflect the actual impact of these costs over futurefperiods, which will affect net income. In addition, the net book value of real estate assets could be over or understated. The statement of cash flows, however, would not be affected.

Accruals of Operating Expenses: The Company accrues for property tax expenses, performance bonuses and other operating expenses each quarter based on historical trends and anticipated disbursements. If these estimatesare incorrect, the timing of expense recognition will be affected.

Accruals for Contingencies: The Company is exposed to business and legal liability risks with respect to events that may have occurred, but in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”) has not accrued for such potential liabilities because the loss is either not probable or not estimable. Futureevents and the result of pending litigation could result in such potential losses becoming probable and estimable, which could have a material adverse impact on our financial condition or results of operations.

Effect of Economic Conditions on the Company’s Operations: Over the course of 2006, improving economic conditions in the United States were reflected in commercial real estate as market conditions allowed for higher rents throughout the Company’s portfolio along with a continued reduction in rent concessions and tenant improvement allowances.

Subsequent to December 31, 2006, a tenant occupying approximately 134,000 square feet defaulted on its lease.The Company is currently pursuing legal action against the tenant and is uncertain of the outcome. While the Company historically has experienced a low level of write-offs due to bankruptcy, there is inherent uncertainty in a fftenant’s ability to continue paying rent if they are in bankruptcy. As of December 31kk , 2006 the Company had approximately 18,000 square feet occupied by a tenant protected by Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code. Given the historical uncertainty of a tenant’s ability to meet its lease obligations, we will continue to reserve any income that would have been realized on a straight line basis. Several other tenants have contacted us, requesting earlytermination of their lease, reduction in space under lease, rent deferment or abatement. At this time, the Company cannot anticipate what impact, if any, the ultimate outcome of these discussions will have on our operating results.

Effect of Economic Conditions on the Company’s Primary Markets: The Company has concentrated itsoperations in nine markets. Each of these markets has been affected by changing economic conditions in some way. The Company’s overall view of these markets as of December 31, 2006 is summarized below. During the year ended December 31, 2006, the Company has seen rental rates on executed leases increase by an average of 2.7% over the most recent in-place rents. Each of the nine markets that the Company owns assets in is subject to its ownunique market influences. The Company has outlined the various market influences for each specific market below.In addition, the Company has compiled market occupancy information using third party reports for each of therespective markets. These sources are deemed to be reliable by the Company, but there can be no assurance that these reports are accurate.

The Company owns approximately 4.0 million square feet in Southern California. This is one of the healthiest markets in our portfolio. In 2006 the market experienced rising rental rates. Vacancy rates decreased slightly throughout Southern California with an average market vacancy rate of 5.3% for 2006. The rental rates on newtransactions within the Company’s properties improved by 6.7% over in-place rents. The Company’s vacancy rate at December 31, 2006 was 3.8%.

The Company owns approximately 1.6 million square feet in Northern California with a concentration in tSacramento, the East Bay (Hayward and San Ramon) and the Silicon Valley (San Jose). The vacancy rates in these

30

submarkets stand at 8.6%, 4.6% and 7.5%, respectively. Market rental rates dropped dramatically in 2006 and 2005as a result of an oversupply of commercial space and weak demand. During 2006, certain portions of the NorthernCalifornia market began to experience improving demand for space, resulting in a slight decrease in market vacancy.The Company’s vacancy rate at December 31, 2006 was 6.5%.

The Company owns approximately 1.2 million square feet in the Austin and Greater Houston markets. The tAustin market has had a steady level of lease demand during 2006 which has enabled the Company to increase rental rates on new leases by approximately 12.3% over in-place rents. The Houston market continues to stabilize occupancy and rental rates. With a more diverse tenant base, this market has not been as significantly impacted as other parts of Texas that were more reliant on the telecommunications and technology industries, which contracted over the last several years. In addition, the strong oil and gas industry has helped stabilize and improve the Houstonmarket. The Company’s vacancy rate at December 31, 2006 was 7.8%.

The Company owns approximately 1.7 million square feet in the Dallas Metroplex market. The vacancy rate inLas Colinas, where most of the Company’s properties are located, is 12.5%. During 2006, modest new construction continued, which included both speculative construction, as well as owner user construction. The Company believesthat any such new construction could cause vacancy rates to rise and limit opportunities to increase rental rates. However, 2006 brought a higher level of leasing activity in the market than it had experienced over the past twoyears. The Company’s vacancy rate at December 31, 2006 was 16.3%.

The Company owns approximately 3.6 million square feet in South Florida. On December 8, 2006, the Company acquired two assets with a combined total of 398,000 rentable square feet located in Palm Beach County. The assets,which are comprised of Boca Commerce Park and Wellington Commerce Park, was 97.8% occupied at the time of acquisition. Miami International Commerce Center (“MICC”) located in the Airport West submarket of Miami-Dade County had a vacancy rate of 1.2% compared with a vacancy rate for the entire submarket of 5.9%. MICC is located less than one mile from the cargo entrance of the Miami International Airport, which is considered one of the most active ports in the Southeast. Leasing activity is strong, resulting in better than market occupancy.

The Company owns approximately 2.9 million square feet in the Northern Virginia submarket of WashingtonD.C., where the average market vacancy rate was 8.6% for 2006. Washingtt on D.C. submarkets have continued to be positively impacted by federal government spending and government contracting trends. The Company’s vacancyrate at December 31, 2006 was 6.7%.

The Company owns approximately 1.8 million square feet in the Maryland submarket of Washington D.C. The portfolio is located primarily in Montgomery County and Silver Spring. The Company expects the business of the federal government, defense contractors and the biotech industry to remain stable in 2007. The Company’s vacancy rate at December 31, 2006 was 4.4% compared to the 2006 market average of 8.8%.

The Company owns approximately 1.3 million square feet in the Beaverton submarket of Portland, Oregon. In2006, the Company experienced improving lease terms as a result of incrd easing lease activity. The vacancy rate in this market is over 17.1%. On the supply side, the Company does not believe significant new construction starts will occur during 2007 as light demand and general availability had a negative impact on the market rental rates. The Company’s vacancy rate at December 31, 2006 was 7.7%.

The Company owns approximately 679,000 square feet in the Phoenix market. Overall, the Phoenix market hasbeen characterized by steady growth. However, average market rental rates have declined over the past several yearsas demand for space subsided. The vacancy rate in this market is over 7.3%. The Company’s vacancy rate at December 31, 2006 was 8.4%.

Growth of the Company’s Operations and Acquisitions and Dispositions of Properties: During 2005 and 2006,the Company focused on maximizing cash flow from its existing core portfolio of properties and through acquisitions and dispositions of properties, expanding its presence in existing markets through strategic acquisitions.

In 2006, the Company added 1.2 million square feet to its portfolio at an aggregate cost of $180.3 million. TheCompany acquired WesTech Business Park, a 366,000 square foot office and flex park in Silver Spring, Maryland, for $69.3 million; a 88,800 square foot multi-tenant flex buildings in Signal Hill, California, for $10.7 million; a

31

107,300 square foot multi-tenant flex park in Chantilly, Virginia, for $15.8 million; Meadows Corporate Park, a 165,000 square foot multi-tenant office park in Silver Spring, Maryland, for $29.9 million; Rogers Avenue, a 66,500square foot multi-tenant industrial and flex park in San Jose, California, for $8.4 million; and Boca Commerce Park and Wellington Commerce Park, two multi-tenant industrial, flex and storage parks, aggregating 398,000 square feet, located in Palm Beach County, Florida, for $46.2 million. In connection with the Meadows Corporate Park purchase, the Company assumed a $16.8 million mortgage with a fixed interest rate of 7.20% through November, 2011, at which time it can be prepaid without penalty. In addition, in connection with the Palm Beach County purchases, the Company assumed three mortgages with a combined total of $23.8 million with a weighted averagefixed interest rate of 5.84%. During 2005, the Company acquired a 233,000 square foot, multi-tenant flex and officeproperty in San Diego, California, for $35.1 million including the assumption of a $15.0 million mortgage which bears an interest rate of 5.73% and matures on March 1, 2013. During 2004, the Company acquired a 165,000 square foot office complex in Fairfax, Virginia, for $24.1 million. The Company plans to continue to build itspresence in existing markets by acquiring high quality facilities in selected markets. The Company targets propertieswith below market rents which may offer it growth in rental rates above market averages, and which offer theCompany the ability to achieve economies of scale resulting in more efficient operations.

Subsequent to December 31, 2006, the Company acquired Overlake Business Center, a 493,000 square foot multi-tenant office and flex business park located in Redmond, Washington, for $76.0 million, including transaction costs. The park, which was 90.0% leased at the time of acquisition, has 171 tenants in 27 separate one and two story buildings.

During 2006, the Company sold a 30,500 square foot building located in Beaverton, Oregon, for $4.4 million resulting in a gain of $1.5 million. Additionally in 2006, the Company sold 32,400 square feet in Miami for acombined total of $3.7 million, resulting in a gain of $865,000.

In 2005, the Company sold Woodside Corporate Park located in Beaverton, Oregon. Net proceeds from the sales were $64.5 million and the Company reported a gain of $12.5 million. The sale consisted of 13 buildings comprising 574,000 square feet and 3.3 acres of adjacent land. The park was 76.8% leased at the time of the sale. In addition, kthe Company sold 8.2 acres of land in the Beaverton area for $3.6 million resulting in a gain of $1.8 million. Six units totaling 44,000 square feet and a small parcel of land at Miami International Commerce Center (“MICC”) were sold for a combined sales price of $5.8 million resulting in an aggregate gain of $1.9 million. The Company sold a retail center located at MICC consisting of 56,000 square feet for a sales price of $12.2 million resulting in a gain of t$967,000.

In 2004, the Company sold a 43,000 square foot flex facility in Austin, Texas, for gross proceeds of $1.2 million,a 30,500 square foot building in Beaverton, Oregon, for gross proceeds of $3.1 million, a 10,000 and 7,100 squarefoot unit at MICC, with combined gross proceeds of $1.9 million and two flex parks totaling 400,000 square feet in Maryland, for combined gross proceeds of $44.2 million. In connection with thf ese sales, the Company reported an aggregate gain of $15.5 million.

Impact of Inflation: Although inflation has not been significant in recent years, it is still a factor in our economyand the Company continues to seek ways to mitigate its impact. A substantial portion of the Company’s leases require tenants to pay operating expenses, including real estate taxes, utilities, and insurance, as well as increases in common area expenses, partially reducing the Company’s exposure to inflation. During 2005 and 2006, the Company experienced a significant increase in certain operating costs including repairs and maintenance, propertyinsurance and utility costs impacting the Company’s overall profit margin. The Company anticipates that this inflationary pressure will likely continue in 2007.

Concentration of Portfolio by Region: Rental income, cost of operations and rental income less cost of operations, excluding depreciation and amortization or net operating income prior to depreciation and amortization(defined as “NOI” for purposes of the following table) from continuing operations are summarized for the year ended December 31, 2006 by major geographic region below. The Company uses NOI and its components as ameasurement of the performance of its commercial real estate. Management believes that these financial measures provide them as well as the investor the most consistent measurement on a comparative basis of the performance of the commercial real estate and its contribution to the value of the Company. Depreciation and amortization have been excluded from these financial measures as they are generally not used in determining the value of commercial

32

real estate by management or the investment community. Depreciation and amortization are generally not used indetermining value as they consider the historical costs of as asset compared to its current value; therefore, to understand the effect of the assets’ historical cost on the Company’s results, investors should look at GAAP financial measures, such as total operating costs including depreciation and amortization. The Company’scalculation of NOI may not be comparable to those of other companies and should not be used as an alternative tomeasures of performance calculated in accordance with generally accepted accn ounting principles. The table below reflects rental income, operating expenses and NOI from continuing operations for the year ended December 31,2006 based on geographical concentration. The total of all regions is equal to the amount of rental income and cost of operations recorded by the Company in accordance with GAAP. We have also included the most comparableGAAP measure which includes total depreciation and amortization. The percent of totals by region reflects theactual contribution to rental income, cost of operations and NOI during the period from properties included in continuing operations (in thousands):

Region

WeightedSquare Footage

Percent of Total

Rental Income

Percent of Total

Cost of Operations

Percent of Total NOI

Percent of Total

Southern California ........................... 3,946 21.9% $ 61,227 25.3% $ 17,591 23.6% $ 43,636 26.1%Northern California ........................... 1,512 8.4% 19,023 7.8% 5,043 6.8% 13,980 8.3%Southern Texas .................................. 1,161 6.4% 10,472 4.3% 4,668 6.2% 5,804 3.5%Northern Texas .................................. 1,689 9.4% 14,736 6.1% 5,811 7.8% 8,925 5.3%South Florida ..................................... 3,226 17.9% 24,673 10.2% 8,172 10.9% 16,501 9.9% Virginia.............................................. 2,844 15.7% 50,803 21.0% 14,286 19.1% 36,517 21.8%Maryland ........................................... 1,651 9.1% 35,419 14.6% 9,953 13.3% 25,466 15.2% Oregon ............................................... 1,342 7.4% 18,860 7.8% 6,401 8.6% 12,459 7.4% Arizona .............................................. 679 3.8% 7,001 2.9% 2,746 3.7% 4,255 2.5%Total before depreciation and

amortization..................................... 18,050 100.0% 242,214 100.0% 74,671 100.0% 167,543 100.0%Depreciation and amortization .......... — 86,216— (86,216) Total................................................... $ 242,214 $ 160,887 $ 81,327

Concentration of Credit Risk by Industry: The information below depicts the industry concentration of our tenant base as of December 31, 2006. The Company analyzes this concentration to minimize significant industry exposure risk.

Business services ........................................................................................................................... 11.5%Government ................................................................................................................................... 11.1%Financial services........................................................................................................................... 10.4%Contractors..................................................................................................................................... 9.5%Computer hardware, software and related service ......................................................................... 9.1%Warehouse, transportation and logistics ........................................................................................ 9.1%Health services............................................................................................................................... 7.3%Communications ............................................................................................................................ 5.8%Retail.............................................................................................................................................. 5.8%Home furnishing ............................................................................................................................ 3.8%Electronics ..................................................................................................................................... 3.1%

86.5%

The information below depicts the Company’s top ten customers by annual rents as of December 31, 2006 (in thousands):

Tenants Square Footage Annual Rents (1) % of Total

Annual RentsU.S. Government........................................................... 469 $ 12,854 5.1%Kaiser Permanente ........................................................ 194 3,693 1.5%County of Santa Clara ................................................... 97 3,191 1.3%Intel ............................................................................... 214 3,024 1.2%Axcelis Technologies.................................................... 89 1,802 0.7%Wells Fargo................................................................... 102 1,651 0.7%AARP............................................................................ 102 1,542 0.6%Northrop Grumman....................................................... 58 1,539 0.6%Raytheon ....................................................................... 77 1,239 0.5%MCI............................................................................... 72 1,227 0.5%

1,474 $ 31,762 12.7%

33

(1) For leases expiring prior to December 31, 2007, annualized rental income represents income to be received under existing leases from December 31, 2006 through the date of expiration.

Comparison of 2006 to 2005

Results of Operations: Net income for the year ended December 31, 2006 was $64.6 million compared to $75.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2005. Net income allocable to common shareholders (net income less preferred stock distributions) for the year ended December 31, 2006 was $16.6 million compared to $32.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2005. Net income per common share on a diluted basis was $0.77 for the year ended December 31, 2006 compared to $1.47 for the year ended December 31, 2005 (based on weighted averagediluted common shares outstanding of 21,646,000 and 22,018,000, respectively). The decrease was due to a reduction in income from discontinued operations of $14.0 million combined with an increase in non-cash distributions associated with preferred equity redemptions of $4.4 million, partially offset by the increase in income from continuing operations of $3.3 million.

The following table presents the operating results of the properties for the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005 in addition to other income and expense items affecting income from continuing operations. The Companybreaks out Same Park operations to provide information regarding trends for properties the Company has held for the periods being compared (in thousands, except per square foot data):

For the Years Ended December 31, 2006 2005 Change

Rental income: Same Park (17.3 million rentable square feet) (1) ............................... $ 227,073 $ 218,981 3.7% Other facilities (1.4 million rentable square feet) (2)........................... 15,141 623 2,330.3%

Total rental income................................................................................ 242,214 219,604 10.3% Cost of operations: Same Park ............................................................................................ 69,271 65,558 5.7%Other facilitieff s ..................................................................................... 5,400 154 3,406.5%

Total cost of operations ........................................................................f . 74,671 65,712 13.6% Net operating income (3): Same Park ............................................................................................ 157,802 153,423 2.9%Other facilitieff s ..................................................................................... 9,741 469 1,977.0%

Total net operating income .................................................................... 167,543 153,892 8.9% Other income and expenses: Facility management fees .................................................................... 625 579 7.9% Interest and other income..................................................................... 6,874 4,888 40.6% Interest expense ................................................................................... (2,575) (1,330) 93.6%Depreciation and amortization............................................................. (86,216) (76,178) 13.2% General and administrative .................................................................. (7,046) (5,843) 20.6%Asset impairment due to casualty loss ................................................. — (72— ) (100.0%)

Income before discontinued operations and minority interest ............... $ 79,205 $ 75,936 4.3% Same Park gross margin (4)................................................................... 69.5% 70.1% (0.9%)Same Park weighted average for the period: Occupancy ........................................................................................... 93.4% 92.3% 1.2% Realized rent per square foot (5).......................................................... $ 14.09 $ 13.75 2.5%

____________ (1) See below for a definition of Same Park.

(2) Represents operating properties owned by the Company as of December 31, 2006 that are not included in SamePark.

(3) Net operating income (“NOI”) is an important measurement in the commercial real estate industry for determining the value of the real estate generating the NOI. See “Concentration of Portfolio by Region” abovefor more information on NOI. The Company’s calculation of NOI may not be comparable to those of other companies and should not be used as an alternative to measures of performance in accordance with GAAP.

34

(4) Same Park gross margin is computed by dividing Same Park NOI by Same Park rental income.

(5) Same Park realized rent per square foot represents the Same Park rental income earned per occupied square foot.

Supplemental Property Data and Trends: In order to evaluate the performance of the Company’s overall portfolio over two given years, management analyzes the operating performance of a consistent group of properties owned and operated throughout both those years. The Company refers to those properties as the Same Park facilities. For 2006 and 2005, the Same Park facilities constitute 17.3 million rentable square feet, which includes all assets in continuing operations that the Company owned and operated from January 1, 2005 through December 31, 2006, representing approximately 92.4% of the total square footage of the Company’s portfolio for 2006.

Rental income, cost of operations and rental income less cost of operations, excluding depreciation and amortization, or net operating income prior to depreciation and amortization (defined as “NOI” for purposes of thefollowing table) from continuing operations are summarized for the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005 by major geographic region below. See “Concentration of Portfolio by Region” above for more information on NOI, including why the Company presents NOI and how the Company uses NOI. The Company’s calculation of NOImay not be comparable to those of other companies and should not be used as an alternative to measures of performance calculated in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles.

The following table summarizes the Same Park operating results by major geographic region for the years endedDecember 31, 2006 and 2005. In addition, the table reflects the comparative impact on the overall rental income, mmcost of operations and NOI from properties that have been acquired since January 1, 2005 and the impact of such isincluded in Other Facilities in the table below (in thousands):

Region

Rental IncomeDecember 31,

2006

Rental Income December 31, 2005

Increase (Decrease)

Cost of Operations December 31, 2006

Cost of Operations

December 31,2005

Increase (Decrease)

NOI December 31, 2006

NOI December 31,

2005 Increase

(Decrease) Southern California ............ $ 56,911 $ 54,096 5.2% $ 15,926 $ 14,843 7.3% $ 40,985 $ 39,253 4.4% Northern California ............ 18,854 18,971 (0.6%) 5,006 4,583 9.2% 13,848 14,388 (3.8%)Southern Texas ................... 10,472 9,615 8.9% 4,668 4,115 13.4% 5,804 5,500 5.5%Northern Texas ................... 14,736 15,712 (6.2%) 5,811 5,337 8.9% 8,925 10,375 (14.0%) South Florida ...................... 24,316 22,080 10.1% 8,041 7,767 3.5% 16,275 14,313 13.7% Virginia............................... 50,055 48,699 2.8% 14,056 13,881 1.3% 35,999 34,818 3.4% Maryland ............................ 25,868 24,189 6.9% 6,616 6,490 1.9% 19,252 17,699 8.8%Oregon ................................ 18,860 18,683 0.9% 6,401 5,883 8.8% 12,459 12,800 (2.7%)Arizona ............................... 7,001 6,936 0.9% 2,746 2,659 3.3% 4,255 4,277 (0.5%) Total Same Park ................. 227,073 218,981 3.7% 69,271 65,558 5.7% 157,802 153,423 2.9% Other Facilities ................... 15,141 623 2,330.3% 5,400 154 3,406.5% 9,741 469 1,977.0%Total before depreciation

and amortization............... 242,214 219,604 10.3% 74,671 65,712 13.6% 167,543 153,892 8.9% Depreciation and

amortization...................... — —— — 86,216— 76,178 13.2% (86,216) (76,178) 13.2%Total based on GAAP ........ $ 242,214 $ 219,604 10.3% $ 160,887 $ 141,890 13.4% $ 81,327 $ 77,714 4.6%

The discussion of regional information below relates to Same Park properties:

Southern California

This region includes San Diego, Orange and Los Angeles Counties. The increase in rental income was the result of a strong market supported by a diverse economy. The Company’s weighted average occupancies for the region increased from 94.8% in 2005 to 96.2% in 2006. Realized rent per square foot increased 3.7% from $15.57 per square foot for 2005 to $16.14 per square foot in 2006. These markets experienced increasing rental rates and decreasing vacancy rates as a result of sustained strong economic conditions.

Northern California

This region includes Sacramento, South San Francisco, the East Bay and the Silicon Valley submarkets that had been affected by high vacancy due in part to failed technology companies. Economic conditions in the Silicon Valley submarkets began to show some signs of recovery as demand for space increased and rents started to stabilize. The Company’s weighted average occupancies outperformed the market with occupancy increasing from 93.2% in 2005 to 94.7% in 2006. Realized rent per square foot decreased 2.1% from $13.56 per square foot in 2005 compared to $13.27 per square foot in 2006.

35

Southern Texas

This region, which includes Austin and Houston, is one of the Company’s markets that has faced challengingmarket conditions with the Company’s operating results continuing to be impacted by the effects of sharply reduced market rental rates, higher vacancies and business failures. During 2006, the Company’s Southern Texas portfolio experienced a moderate level of activity which was evidenced in the occupancy improvement within the portfolio.The Company’s weighted average occupancies increased from 85.9% in 2005 to 89.5% in 2006. Realized rent per msquare foot increased 4.6% from $9.64 per square foot in 2005 to $10.08 per square foot in 2006.

Northern Texas

This region consists of the Dallas market. This market has been impacted by high vacancy levels and rent roll downs due to general availability of space, modest economic drivers and ongoing development. However, leasing activity in the market increased modestly during 2006. The Company’s weighted average occupancies for the region decreased from 85.9% in 2005 to 80.3% in 2006. The decrease was primarily due to the early 2006 expiration of 198,000 square feet previously leased to Citigroup. As of December 31, 2006, all of this space has been re-leased. Realized rent per square foot increased 0.4% from $10.82 per square foot in 2005 to $10.86 per square foot in 2006.

South Florida

This region consists of the Company’s business park located in the submarket of Miami-Dade County. The park is located less than one mile from the Miami International Airport. The Company’s weighted average occupanciesfor the park increased from 92.8% in 2005 to 96.4% in 2006. Realized rent per square foot increased 5.9% from $7.44 per square foot in 2005 to $7.88 in 2006. Operating expenses for the year ended December 31, 2006 increased by 3.5% over the same period in 2005 due primarily to repairs and maintenance related to the continued clean-up from hurricane damage sustained in 2005 along with increased insurance and utility costs.

Virginia

This region includes the major Northern Virginia suburban markets surrounding the greater Washington D.C. metropolitan area. The greater Washington D.C. market continues to demonstrate solid fundamentals with sustained demand for space, improving rental rates and lower concessions. A major contributor to the market strength was tied to government contracting and defense spending. Approximately 11.7% of the existing leases in this market were executed prior to 2002, which was considered a high point in the market. This has and will continue to result insome rental rate roll downs as these leases are replaced at market rates. The Company’s weighted averageoccupancies decreased from 95.4% in 2005 to 94.8% in 2006. Realized rent per square foot increased 3.3% from $18.33 per square foot in 2005 to $18.94 per square foot in 2006.

Maryland

This region consists of facilities primarily in Montgomery County. Considered part of the greater WashingtonD.C. market, Maryland continues to experience solid market demand. In more recent years this submarket has had a significant amount of sublease space, which placed increased pressure on rental rates and vacancy. This supply of sublease space has decreased, thereby decreasing downward pressure on rental rates. Approximately 7.4% of the existing leases in this market were executed prior to 2002, which was considered a high point in the market. This has and will continue to result in some rental rate roll downs. The Company’s weighted average occupancies increased from 95.4% in 2005 to 97.4% in 2006. Considered part of the Washington DC Metro market, Maryland is experiencing improving market conditions due primarily to higher levels of government contracting. Realized rent per square foot increased 4.8% from $20.47 per square foot in 2005 to $21.45 per square foot in 2006.

Oregon

This region consists primarily of two business parks in the Beaverton submarket of Portland, Oregon. Portland has been one of the markets hardest hit by the technology slowdown. In 2003 and 2004, the slowdown resulted inearly lease terminations, low levels of tenant retention and significant declines in rental rates. During 2005 and continuing in 2006, the market experienced higher levels of leasing activity, with rental rates declining significantly f

36

from in-place rents and higher leasing concessions. The Company’s weighted average occupancies increased from 86.2% in 2005 to 90.0% in 2006. Realized rent per square foot decreased 3.2% from $16.15 per square foot in 2005 to $15.63 per square foot in 2006.

Arizona

The Arizona region consists primarily of properties in the Phoenix and Tempe areas, where rents are moderatelyincreasing and rent concessions have been reduced. The Company’s weighted average occupancies in the region decreased from 94.5% in 2005 to 94.0% in 2006. Realized rent per square foot increased 1.6% from $10.81 per square foot in 2005 to $10.98 in 2006.

Facility Management Operations: The Company’s facility management operations account for a small portionof the Company’s net income. During the year ended December 31, 2006, $625,000 of revenue was recognized fromfacility management fees compared to $579,000 for the year ended December 31, 2005.

Cost of Operations: Cost of operations, excluding discontinued operations, was $74.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2006 compared to $65.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2005. The increase was dueprimarily to the growth in the square footage of the Company’s portfolio of properties. Cost of operations as a percentage of rental income increased slightly from 29.9% in 2005 to 30.8% in 2006. Cost of operations for the year ended December 31, 2006 consisted primarily of the following items: property taxes ($21.1 mtt illion); propertymaintenance ($17.1 million); utilities ($15.2 million); and payroll ($12.0 million) as compared to cost of operations for the year ended December 31, 2005 which consisted primarily of the following items: property taxes ($19.5million); property maintenance ($15.1 million); utilities ($12.8 million); and payroll ($10.2 million).

Depreciation and Amortization Expense: Depreciation and amortization expense, excluding discontinuedoperations, was $86.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2006 compared to $76.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2005. The increase is primarily due to the acquisitions in 2006, as well as depreciation expense on capital and tenant improvements acquired during 2005.

General and Administrative Expense: General and administrative expense was $7.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2006 compared to $5.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2005. General and administrativeexpenses for the year ended December 31, 2006 consisted mainly of the following items: expenses which relate to the accounting, finance, and executive divisions of the Company, which primarily consist of payroll expenses ($2.9million); professional fees, including expenses related to outside accounting, tax, legal and investor services ($1.2million); stock compensation expense ($2.2 million); and other various expenses. General and administrativeexpenses for the year ended December 31, 2005 consisted mainly of the following items: expenses which relate to the accounting, finance, and executive divisions of the Company, which primarily consist of payroll expenses ($3.0million); professional fees, including expenses related to outside accounting, tax, legal and investor services ($1.1million); stock compensation expense ($634,000); and other various expenses. The increase in stock compensation expense was primarily due to the long term incentive plan for senior management put into place in the first quarter of 2006.

Interest and Other Income: Interest and other income reflects earnings on cash balances and dividends on marketable securities in addition to miscellaneous income items. Interest income was $6.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2006 compared to $4.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2005. Interest income for the year ended December 31, 2006 primarily related to interest earned on cash balances which earned approximately 4.9%interest compared to 3.1% in 2005.

Interest Expense: Interest expense was $2.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2006 compared to $1.3 rmillion for the year ended December 31, 2005. The increase is primarily attributable to the mortgages assumed in connection with the purchase of Rose Canyon Business Park in San Diego, California, Meadows Corporate Park in Silver Spring, Maryland and Wellington Commerce Park and Boca Commerce Park in Palm Beach County, Florida.m

Gain on Disposition of Real Estate: Included in income from discontinued operations are gains on dispositions of real estate for the year ended December 31, 2006 of $2.3 million compared to $18.1 million for the year ended dDecember 31, 2005. During the year ended December 31, 2006, the Company disposed of five properties, four inMiami and one in Oregon. The four properties in Miami generated an aggregate gain of $865,000 with the

37

remaining one property in Oregon providing a net gain of $1.5 million. In 2005, the Company disposed of eight properties, one in Oregon and seven in Miami, as well as, three parcels of land in Oregon and a small parcel of land in Miami. The property in Beaverton, Oregon generated a gain of $12.5 million with the remaining properties and land providing a net gain of $5.6 million.

Minority Interest in Income: Minority interest in income reflects the income allocable to equity interests in the Operating Partnership that are not owned by the Company. Minority interest in income was $16.8 million ($11.2 million allocated to preferred unit holders and $5.7 million allocated to common unit holders) for the year ended December 31, 2006 compared to $21.5 million ($10.7 million allocated to preferred unit holders and $10.9 million allocated to common unit holders) for the year ended December 31, 2005. The decrease was primarily due to thereduction of gain on disposition of real estate and income from sold properties allocated to minority interest offset with an increase in additional distributions to preferred unit holders for redemption of preferred partnership units.

Comparison of 2005 to 2004

Results of Operations: Net income for the year ended December 31, 2005 was $75.3 million compared to $62.1million for the year ended December 31, 2004. Net income allocable to common shareholders (net income lesspreferred stock distributions) for the year ended December 31, 2005 was $32.3 million compared to $29.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2004. Net income per common share on a diluted basis was $1.47 for the year ended December 31, 2005 compared to $1.33 for the year ended December 31, 2004 (based on weighted average diluted common shares outstanding of 22,018,000 and 21,960,000, respectively). The increase was due to theincrease in rental income of $8.7 million and interest income of $4.5 million partially offset by an increase in cost of operations of $2.7 million and depreciation of $6.2 million.

The following table presents the operating results of the properties for the years ended December 31, 2005 and 2004 in addition to other income and expense items affecting income from continuing operations. The Company breaks out Same Park operations to provide information regarding trends for properties the Company has held for the periods being compared (in thousands, except per square foot data):

For the Years Ended December 31, 2005 2004 Change

Rental income: Same Park (17.1 million rentable square feet) (1) ............................. $ 215,715 $ 209,191 3.1%Other facilities (398,000 rentable square feet) (2) ............................. 3,889 1,746 122.7%

Total rental income.............................................................................. 219,604 210,937 4.1% Cost of operations: Same Park .......................................................................................... 64,316 62,288 3.3%Other facilitieff s ................................................................................... 1,396 706 97.7%

Total cost of operations ......................................................................f . 65,712 62,994 4.3% Net operating income (3): Same Park .......................................................................................... 151,399 146,903 3.1% Other facilitieff s ................................................................................... 2,493 1,040 139.7%

Total net operating income .................................................................. 153,892 147,943 4.0% Other income and expenses: Facility management fees .................................................................. 579 624 (7.2%)Interest and other income................................................................... 4,888 406 1103.9%Interest expense ................................................................................. (1,330) (3,054) (56.5%) Depreciation and amortization........................................................... (76,178) (69,942) 8.9%General and administrative ................................................................ (5,843) (4,628) 26.3% Asset impairment due to casualty loss ............................................... (72) — 100.0% —

Income before discontinued operations and minority interest ............. $ 75,936 $ 71,349 6.4% Same Park gross margin (4)................................................................. 70.2% 70.2% — Same Park weighted average for the period: Occupancy ......................................................................................... 92.3% 89.0% 3.7% Realized rent per square foot (5)........................................................ $ 13.68 $ 13.75 (0.5%)

____________(1) See below for a definition of Same Park.

38

(2) Represents operating properties owned by the Company as of December 31, 2005 that are not included in Same Park.

(3) Net operating income (“NOI”) is an important measurement in the commercial real estate industry for determining the value of the real estate generating the NOI. See “Concentration of Portfolio by Region” above for more information on NOI. The Company’s calculation of NOI may not be comparable to those of other companies and should not be used as an alternative to measures of performance in accordance with GAAP.

(4) Same Park gross margin is computed by dividing Same Park NOI by Same Park rental income.

(5) Same Park realized rent per square foot represents the Same Park rental income earned per occupied square foot.

Supplemental Property Data and Trends: In order to evaluate the performance of the Company’s overall portfolio over two given years, management analyzes the operating performance of a consistent group of properties owned and operated throughout both those years. The Company refers to those properties as the Same Park facilities. For 2005 and 2004, the Same Park facilities constitute 17.1 million rentable square feet, which includes all assets in continuing operations that the Company owned and operated from January 1, 2004 through December 31, 2005, representing approximately 97.7% of the total square footage of the Company’s portfolio for 2005.

Rental income, cost of operations and rental income less cost of operations, excluding depreciation and amortization, or net operating income prior to depreciation and amortization (defined as “NOI” for purposes of thefollowing table) from continuing operations are summarized for the years ended December 31, 2005 and 2004 by major geographic region below. See “Concentration of Portfolio by Region” above for more information on NOI, including why the Company presents NOI and how the Company uses NOI. The Company’s calculation of NOImay not be comparable to those of other companies and should not be used as an alternative to measures of performance calculated in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles.

The following table summarizes the Same Park operating results by major geographic region for the years endedDecember 31, 2005 and 2004. In addition, the table reflects the comparative impact on the overall rental income, mmcost of operations and NOI from properties that have been acquired since January 1, 2004 and the impact of such isincluded in Other Facilities in the table below (in thousands):

Region

Rental IncomeDecember 31,

2005

Rental Income December 31, 2004

Increase (Decrease)

Cost of Operations December 31, 2005

Cost of Operations

December 31,2004

Increase (Decrease)

NOI December 31, 2005

NOI December 31,

2004 Increase

(Decrease) Southern California ............ $ 54,099 $ 51,796 4.4% $ 14,850 $ 14,151 4.9% $ 39,249 $ 37,645 4.3% Northern California ............ 18,971 19,493 (2.7%) 4,583 4,576 0.2% 14,388 14,917 (3.5%)Southern Texas ................... 9,615 9,653 (0.4%) 4,115 4,189 (1.8%) 5,500 5,464 0.7% Northern Texas ................... 15,712 14,162 10.9% 5,337 5,466 (2.4%) 10,375 8,696 19.3%South Florida ...................... 22,080 20,286 8.8% 7,767 7,190 8.0% 14,313 13,096 9.3% Virginia............................... 45,430 44,379 2.4% 12,632 12,199 3.5% 32,798 32,180 1.9% Maryland ............................ 24,189 24,421 (1.0%) 6,490 6,262 3.6% 17,699 18,159 (2.5%)Oregon ................................ 18,683 18,413 1.5% 5,883 5,497 7.0% 12,800 12,916 (0.9%)Arizona ............................... 6,936 6,588 5.3% 2,659 2,758 (3.6%) 4,277 3,830 11.7%Total Same Park ................. 215,715 209,191 3.1% 64,316 62,288 3.3% 151,399 146,903 3.1% Other Facilities ................... 3,889 1,746 122.7% 1,396 706 97.7% 2,493 1,040 139.7%Total before depreciation

and amortization............... 219,604 210,937 4.1% 65,712 62,994 4.3% 153,892 147,943 4.0% Depreciation and

amortization...................... — —— — 76,178— 69,942 8.9% (76,178) (69,942) 8.9% Total based on GAAP ........ $ 219,604 $ 210,937 4.1% $ 141,890 $ 132,936 6.7% $ 77,714 $ 78,001 (0.4%)

The discussion of regional information below relates to Same Park properties:

Southern California

This region includes San Diego, Orange and Los Angeles Counties. Rental income and NOI for 2005 were slightly higher than 2004 due to an increase in weighted average occupancy and increasing rental rates. Weighted average occupancies have increased from 93.0% in 2004 to 94.8% in 2005. Realized rent per square foot increased2.4% from $15.21 per square foot for 2004 to $15.57 per square foot in 2005. The increases in this market werereflective of the general strength of the Southern California real estate market.

39

Northern California

This region includes Sacramento, South San Francisco, the East Bay and the Silicon Valley, a submarket that ttcontinues to be impacted by an over supply of commercial space due in part to failed technology companies. Rentalincome and NOI decreased from 2004 to 2005 primarily due to the loss of a large tenant in the San Jose portfolio. Weighted average occupancies outperformed the market, yet they decreased from 95.0% in 2004 to 93.2% in 2005 primarily due to a bankruptcy and early termination of a 91,000 square foot tenant in the San Ramon portfolio. Realized rent per square foot decreased 0.8% from $13.68 per square foot in 2004 compared to $13.57 per squarefoot in 2005.

Southern Texas

This region, which includes Austin and Houston, faced challenging market condff itions with the Company’soperating results continuing to be impacted by the effects of sharply reduced market rental rates, higher vacanciesand business failures. These effects on rental revenue were mitigated by reduced operating costs, primarily inpayroll. Weighted average occupancies increased from 83.2% in 2004 to 85.9% in 2005. Despite an increase inoccupancy, realized rent per square foot decreased 3.5% from $9.95 per square foot in 2004 to $9.60 per square foot in 2005.

Northern Texas

This region includes the Dallas area. The increase in rental income and NOI were due primarily to increased occupancies and rental rates. This market continued to be impacted by high vacancy levels due to general availability of space, modest economic drivers and ongoing development. Weighted average occupancies increased from 82.8% in 2004 to 85.9% in 2005. Realized rent per square foot increased 6.8% from $10.14 per square foot in2004 to $10.83 per square foot in 2005.

South Florida

This region includes the Miami area. The Company’s assets continue to outperform the market. Rental income and net operating income increases were a result of occupancy increases. Weighted average occupancies increased uufrom 84.0% in 2004 to 92.9% in 2005. Realized rent per square foot decreased 1.6% from $7.58 in 2004 to $7.46 in2005.

Virginia

This region includes all major Northern Virginia suburban submarkets surrounding the Washington D.C.metropolitan area. The Washington DC Metro market is considered one of the Company’s strongest markets driven largely by increased government contracting and defense spending. In many situations the Company was able to reduce tenant concessions and increase rental rates, yet the Company still had a number of leases executed prior to f2002, which was considered a high point in the market. This continued to result in some rental rate roll downs in the Virginia submarket. The increase in revenue was offset by increasing operating expenses, primarily utilities,resulting in a slight increase in NOI. Weighted average occupancies decreased from 96.5% in 2004 to 95.6% in 2005. Realized rent per square foot increased 3.4% from $17.54 per square foot in 2004 to $18.13 per square foot in 2005.

Maryland

This region consists primarily of facilities in Montgomery County. Weighted average occupancies increased from 91.2% in 2004 to 95.4% in 2005. Considered part of the Washington DC Metro market, Maryland experienced improving market conditions due primarily to higher levels of government contracting. Realized rent per square foot fdecreased 5.3% from $21.63 per square foot in 2004 to $20.49 per square foot in 2005. The decrease in rental rateswas a result of certain large tenants re-leasing at rates below expiring rental rates. The higher rental rates were tied to leases transacted during a high point in this commercial real estate market prior to 2002.

40

Oregon

This region consists primarily of two business parks in the Beaverton submarket of Portland. Oregon was one of the markets hardest hit by the technology slowdown. In 2003 and 2004, the slowdown resulted in early leaseterminations, low levels of tenant retention and significant declines in rental rates. During 2005, the marketexperienced higher levels of leasing activity, with rental rates declining significantly from in-place rents and higher leasing concessions. Weighted average occupancies increased from 78.2% in 2004 to 86.2% in 2005. Realized rent per square foot decreased 8.0% from $17.55 per square foot in 2004 to $16.15 per square foot in 2005.

Arizona

The Arizona region consists primarily of properties in the Phoenix and Tempe areas. The Company’s weighted average occupancies in the region increased from 92.5% in 2004 to 94.5% in 2005. Realized rent per square foot increased 3.1% from $10.49 per square foot in 2004 to $10.81 per square for in 2005.

Facility Management Operations: The Company’s facility management operations account for a small portionof the Company’s net income. During the year ended December 31, 2005, $579,000 of revenue was recognized fromfacility management fees compared to $624,000 for the year ended December 31, 2004.

Cost of Operations: Cost of operations, excluding discontinued operations, was $65.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2005 compared to $63.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2004. The increase was due primarily to the growth in the square footage of the Company’s portfolio of properties. Cost of operations as a percentage of rental income remained flat at 29.9% for 2004 and 2005. Cost of operations for the year ended December 31, 2005 consisted primarily of the following items: property taxes ($19.5 million); property maintenance ($15.1 million); utilities ($12.8 million); and payroll ($10.2 million) as compared to cost of operations for the year ended December 31, 2004 which consisted primarily of the following items: property taxes ($19.2 million); property maintenance ($14.2 million); utilities ($11.3 million); and payroll ($10.5 million).

Depreciation and Amortization Expense: Depreciation and amortization expense, excluding discontinued operations, was $76.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2005 compared to $69.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2004. The increase was primarily due to depreciation expense on capital put in place in 2005 and at the end of 2004.

General and Administrative Expense: General and administrative expense was $5.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2005 compared to $4.6 million for the year ended December 31d , 2004. General and administrative expenses for the year ended December 31, 2005 consisted mainly of the following items: expenses which relate to the accounting, finance, and executive divisions of the Company, which primarily consist of payroll expenses ($3.0 million); professional fees, including expenses related to outside accounting, tax, legal and investor services ($1.1 million); stock compensation expense ($634,000); and other various expenses. General and administrative expenses for the year ended December 31, 2004 consisted mainly of the following items: expensf es which relate to the accounting, finance, and executive divisions of the Company, which primarily consist of payroll expenses ($2.4 million); professional fees, including expenses related to Sarbanes Oxley Section 404 (“SOX 404”) Compliance, outside accounting, tax, legal and investor services ($1.3 million); stock compensation expense ($93,000); and other various expenses. During 2004, the Company incurred approximately $600,000 related to its efforts to ensure compliance with SOX 404. While management experienced the ongoing costs of ensuring compliance with SOX 404 during 2005, the amount decreased substantially as a significant portion of the work that was previously performed by third parties was performed by company employees. The increase in payroll expenses was due to higher levels of salary and related costs resulting from the changes to the Company’s senior management team.

Interest and Other Income: Interest and other income reflects earnings on cash balances and dividends onmarketable securities in addition to miscellaneous income items. Interest income was $4.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2005 compared to $308,000 for the year ended December 31, 2004. Interest income for the year ended December 31, 2005 primarily related to interest earned on cash balances which generally earned approximately 3.1% interest compared to less than 2% in 2004. Additionally, based on the preferred equity activity and property dispositions during 2005, the Company’s average cash on hand of $132.2 million was significantlymore than the average cash on hand during 2004 of $22.7 million.

41

Interest Expense: Interest expense was $1.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2005 compared to $3.1 rmillion for the year ended December 31, 2004. The decrease is attributable to the payoff of the line of credit, a mortgage note payable and an affiliate loan in 2004. No interest expense was capitalized as part of building costsassociated with properties under development during the years ended December 31, 2005 and 2004.

Gain on Disposition of Real Estate: Included in income from discontinued operations are gains on dispositionsof real estate for the year ended December 31, 2005 of $18.1 million compared to $15.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2004. In 2005, the Company disposed of eight properties, one in Oregon and seven in Miami, as well as, three parcels of land in Oregon and a small parcel of land in Miami. The property in Beaverton, Oregongenerated a gain of $12.5 million with the remaining properties and land providing a net gain of $5.6 million. During the year ended December 31, 2004, the Company disposed of six properties, two in Maryland, two in Miami, one in Texas and one in Oregon. The two properties in Maryland generated an aggregate gain of $15.2 million withthe remaining four properties providing a net gain of $300,000.

Minority Interest in Income: Minority interest in income reflects the income allocable to equity interests in the Operating Partnership that are not owned by the Company. Minority interest in income was $21.5 million ($10.7million allocated to preferred unit holders and $10.9 million allocated to common unit holders) for the year ended December 31, 2005 compared to $30.0 million ($20.2 million allocated to preferred unit holders and $9.8 million allocated to common unit holders) for the year ended December 31, 2004. The decrease in minority interest in income was due primarily to the redemptions of preferred operating partnership units during 2004.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

Cash and cash equivalents decreased $134.2 million from $200.4 million at December 31, 2005 to $66.3 million at December 31, 2006. The primary reasons for the decrease were property acquisitions, net change in preferred qqequity, and the repurchase of common stock partially offset by retained operating cash flow.

Net cash provided by operating activities for the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005 was $165.5 millionand $149.4 million, respectively. Management believes that the Company’s internally generated net cash provided by operating activities will continue to be sufficient to enable it to meet its operating expenses, capital improvements and debt service requirements and to maintain the current level of distributions to shareholders in addition toproviding additional retained cash for future growth, debt repayment, and stock repurchases.

Net cash used in investing activities was $170.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2006 compared to cashprovided by investing activities of $24.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2005. The change between years was $194.4 million or 797.0% and was primarily due to cash paid for acquisitions for two properties in Maryland, a property in Virginia, two properties in California and two in Florida for a combined total of $139.0 million. Proceeds from the disposition of real estate facilities for the year ended December 31, 2006 was $7.7 million compared to $84.8 million in the prior year. During the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005 the Companyused $39.2 million and $40.3 million for capital improvements to real estate facilities, respectively. The decrease of $1.1 million or 2.8% resulted from decreased transaction costs.

Net cash used in financing activities was $129.7 million and $13.1 million for the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005. The change of $116.6 million is primarily the result of an increase of $106.9 million in preferredequity redemptions and a decrease of $6.6 million in net proceeds from the issuance of preferred equity. As a result of the 2006 transactions, the Company decreased its preferred equity outstanding from 33.5% of its market capitalization at December 31, 2005 to 25.2% at December 31, 2006. Additionally, the Company repurchased $16.1million of common stock for the year ended December 31, 2006 compared to $14.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2005.

The Company’s capital structure is characterized by nominal debt. As of December 31, 2006, the Company had fseven fixed rate mortgage notes payable totaling $67.0 million, which represented approximately 2.4% of its total market capitalization. The Company calculates market capitalization by adding (1) the liquidation preference of theCompany’s outstanding preferred equity, (2) principal value of the Company’s outstanding mortgages and (3) thetotal number of common shares and common units outstanding at December 31, 2006 multiplied by the closing price

42

of the stock on that date. The weighted average interest rate for the mortgage notes is approximately 6.11% per annum. The Company had approximately 9.0% of its properties, based on net book value, encumbered at December 31, 2006.

During 2006, the Company issued an aggregate of $95.0 million of preferred equity with a rate of 7.375%.Proceeds from the various offerings were used to redeem higher rate preferred equity of $118.9 million with a weighted average rate of 9.389%.

In August of 2005, the Company modified the term of its line of credit (the “Credit Facility”) with Wells FargoBank. The Credit Facility has a borrowing limit of $100.0 million and matures on August 1, 2008. Interest on outstanding borrowings is payable monthly. At the option of the Company, the rate of interest charged is equal to (i)the prime rate or (ii) a rate ranging from the London Interbank Offered Rate (“LIBOR”) plus 0.50% to LIBOR plus 1.20% depending on the Company’s credit ratings and coverage ratios, as defined (currently LIBOR plus 0.65%). Inaddition, the Company is required to pay an annual commitment fee ranging from 0.15% to 0.30% of the borrowing limit (currently 0.20%). In connection with the modification of the Credit Facility, the Company paid a fee of $450,000, which will be amortized over the life of the Credit Facility. The Company had no balance outstanding on its Credit Facility at December 31, 2006 and 2005. The Company repaid in full the $95.0 million outstanding on its line of credit in January, 2004, and subsequently borrowed $138.0 million on its line of credit in 2004 which was repaid in full prior to December 31, 2004.

As of December 31, 2003, the Company had $100.0 million in short-term borrowings from PSI. The note boreinterest at 1.4% and was due on March 9, 2004. The Company repaid the note in full during the first quarter of 2004.

In February, 2002, the Company entered into a seven year $50.0 million term loan agreement with Fleet National rBank. The interest on the note was at LIBOR plus 1.45% and it had an original maturity of February 20, 2009. The Company paid a one-time fee of 0.35% or $175,000 for the facility. In July, 2002, the Company entered into aninterest rate swap transaction which had the effect of fixing the rate on the term loan through July, 2004 at 4.46% per annum. In February, 2004, the Company repaid in full the $50.0 million outstanding on the term loan.

During 2004, the Company issued an aggregate of $437.8 million of preferred equity with an average rate of 7.23%. Proceeds from the various offerings were used to redeem higher rate preferred equity aggregating $185.6 million with an average rate of 8.93%. In addition, proceeds were used to provide permanent financing for theCompany’s acquisitions made in 2003 and 2004 by enabling the Company to repay, in full, the balances outstanding on the Company’s note with PSI, the Credit Facility and the term loan.

The Company’s funding strategy has been to use permanent capital, including common and preferred stock, and internally generated retained cash flows. In addition, the Company may sell properties that no longer meet itsinvestment criteria. The Company may finance acquisitions on a temporary basis with borrowings from its Credit Facility. The Company targets a ratio of funds from operations (“FFO”) to combined fixed charges and preferred distributions of 3.0 to 1.0. Fixed charges include interest expense and capitalized interest. Preferred distributionsinclude amounts paid to preferred shareholders and preferred Operating Partnership unit holders. For the year ended December 31, 2006, the FFO to fixed charges and preferred distributions coverage ratio was 2.9 to 1.0, excluding the effects of Emerging Issues Task Force (“EITF”) Topic D-42.

Non-GAAP Supplemental Disclosure Measure: Funds from Operations: Management believes that FFO is a useful supplemental measure of the Company’s operating performance. The Company computes FFO in accordance with the White Paper on FFO approved by the Board of Governors of the National Association of Real Estate Investment Trusts (“NAREIT”). The White Paper defines FFO as net income, computed in accordance with GAAP,before depreciation, amortization, minority interest in income and extraordinary items. Management believes that FFO provides a useful measure of the Company’s operating performance and when compared year over year, reflects the impact to operations from trends in occupancy rates, rental rates, operating costs, development activities,general and administrative expenses and interest costs, providing a perspective not immediately apparent from net income.

43

FFO should be analyzed in conjunction with net income. However, FFO should not be viewed as a substitute for net income as a measure of operating performance or liquidity as it does not reflect depreciation and amortizationcosts or the level of capital expenditure and leasing costs necessary to maintain the operating performance of theCompany’s properties, which are significant economic costs and could materially impact the Company’s results of yoperations.

Management believes FFO provides useful information to the investment community about the Company’soperating performance when compared to the performance of other real estate companies as FFO is generally recognized as the industry standard for reporting operations of REITs. Other REITs may use different methods for calculating FFO and, accordingly, our FFO may not be comparable to other real estate companies.

FFO for the Company is computed as follows (in thousands):

For the Years Ended December 31, 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 Net income allocable to common

shareholders ..................................... $ 16,647 $ 32,283 $ 29,123 $ 33,312 $ 42,018 Gain on sale of marketable and

other securities ............................... — — — (2,043) (41) Gain on disposition of real estate ..... (2,328) (18,109) (15,462) (2,897) (9,023) Equity income from sale of joint

venture properties........................... — — — (1,376) (861)Depreciation and amortization ......... 86,243 77,420 73,793 59,107 58,144 Depreciation from joint venture ....... — — — — 63Minority interest in income —

common units................................. 5,673 10,869 9,760 11,345 14,243Consolidated FFO allocable to

common shareholders and minority interests ............................. 106,235 102,463 97,214 97,448 104,543

FFO allocated to minority interests — common units.............................. (27,005) (25,810) (24,401) (24,657) (26,291)

FFO allocated to commonshareholders ..................................... $ 79,230 $ 76,653 $ 72,813 $ 72,791 $ 78,252

FFO allocated to common shareholders and minority interests for the year ended December 31, 2006 increased$3.8 million over the year ended December 31, 2005. FFO for the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005included non-cash distributions of $4.7 million and $301,000, respectively, related to the application of EITF Topic D-42 and the redemption of preferred equity. Excluding these non-cash adjustments, the increase in FFO was a result of increased income from operations.

Capital Expenditures: During the years ended December 31, 2006, 2005m and 2004, the Company incurred $34.1 million, $35.8 million and $43.6 million, respectively, in recurring capital expenditures or $1.89, $2.01 and $2.42per weighted average square foot, respectively. The Company defines recurring capital expenditures as thosenecessary to maintain and operate its commercial real estate at its current economic value. The Company expects the higher levels of transactions to continue into 2007 as a result of competition in difficult markets. The followingdepicts actual capital expenditures for the years ended December 31,: (in thousands)

2006 2005 2004Recurring capital expenditures ................................................ $ 34,096 $ 35,821 $ 43,614 Property renovations and other capital expenditures ............... 5,131 4,519 8,455Total capital expenditures........................................................ $ 39,227 $ 40,340 $ 52,069

Stock Repurchase: The Company’s Board of Directors has authorized the repurchase, from time to time, of upto 4.5 million shares of the Company’s common stock on the open market or in privately negotiated transactions.During the year ended December 31, 2006, the Company repurchased 309,100 shares of common stock at a cost of $16.1 million. During the year ended December 31, 2005, the Company repurchased 361,400 shares of commonstock at a cost of $16.6 million. Since inception through December 31, 2006, the Company has repurchased anaggregate of 3.3 million shares of common stock at an aggregate cost of $102.6 million (average cost of $31.18 per share).

44

Redemption of Preferred Equity: On May 10, 2006, the Company redeemed 2.6 million depositary shares of its 9.500% Cumulative Preferred Stock, Series D for $65.9 million. In accordance with EITF Topic D-42, the redemption resulted in a reduction of net income allocable to common shareholders of $1.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2006 equal to the excess of the redemption amount over the carrying amount of the redeemed securities.

On December 15, 2006, the Company called 2.0 million depositary shares ($50.0 million) of its 8.750%Cumulative Preferred Stock, Series F for January 29, 2007 redemption. The Company reported the excess of theredemption amount over the carrying amount, $1.7 million, as an additional allocation of net income to preferred shareholders and a corresponding reduction of net income allocable to common shareholders and common unitholders for the year ended December 31, 2006.

On September 21, 2006 the Company redeemed 2.1 million units of its 9.250% Series E Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Units for $53.0 million. The Company reported the excess of the redemption amount over the carryingamount, $1.4 million, as an additional allocation of net income to preferred unit holders and a correspondingreduction of net income allocable to common shareholders and common unit holders for the year ended December 31, 2006.

Distributions: The Company has elected and intends to qualify as a REIT for federal income tax purposes. Inorder to maintain its status as a REIT, the Company must meet, among other tests, sources of income, share ownership and certain asset tests. As a REIT, the Company is not taxed on that portion of its taxable income that isdistributed to its shareholders provided that at least 90% of its taxable income is distributed to its shareholders prior to the filing of its tax return.

Related Party Transactions: At December 31, 2006, PSI owned 25.4% of the outstanding shares of theCompany’s common stock and 25.5 % of the outstanding common units of the operating partnership (100.0% of thecommon units not owned by the Company). Assuming conversion of its partnership units PSI would own 44.5% of the outstanding shares of the Company’s common stock. Ronald L. Havner, Jr., the Company’s chairman, is also theChief Executive Officer, President and a Director of PSI. Harvey Lenkin is a Director of both the Company and PSI.

Pursuant to a cost sharing and administrative services agreement, the Company shares costs with PSI and affiliated entities for certain administrative services. These costs totaled $3aa 20,000 in 2006 and are allocated among PSI and its affiliates in accordance with a methodology intended to fairly allocate those costs. In addition, the Company provides property management services for properties owned by PSI and its affiliates for a fee of 5% of the gross revenues of such properties in addition to reimbursement of direct costs. These management fee revenues recognized under management contracts with affiliated parties totaled $625,000 in 2006. In December of 2006, the Company bought two properties in Palm Beach County, Florida, portions of which will be managed by PSI.

Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements: The Company does not have any off-balance sheet arrangements.

Contractual Obligations: The table below summarizes projected payments due under our contractual obligationsas of December 31, 2006 (in thousands):

Payments Due by Period Contractual Obligations Total Less than 1 year 1 — 3 years 3 — 5 years More than 5 yearsMortgage notes payable

(principal and interest) .......................... $ 85,408 $ 10,018 $ 14,473 $ 26,478 $ 34,439

Total................................. $ 85,408 $ 10,018 $ 14,473 $ 26,478 $ 34,439

The Company is scheduled to pay cash dividends of $48.9 million per year on its preferred equity outstanding asof December 31, 2006. Dividends are paid when and if declared by the Company’s Board of Directors and faccumulate if not paid. Shares and units of preferred equity are redeemable by the Company y in order to preserve its status as a REIT and are also redeemable five years after issuance.

45

ITEM 7A. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK

To limit the Company’s exposure to market risk, the Company principally finances its operations and growth with permanent equity capital consisting either of common stock or preferred equity. At December 31, 2006, the Company’s debt as a percentage of shareholders’ equity and minority interest (based on book values) was 5.0%.

The Company’s market risk sensitive instruments include mortgage notes payable of $67.0 million at December 31, 2006. All of the Company’s mortgage notes payable bear interest at fixed rates. See Notes 2, 5, and 6 to Consolidated Financial Statements for the terms, valuations and approximate principal maturities of the Company’s mortgage notes payable and the line of credit as of December 31, 2006. Based on borrowing rates currently available to the Company, combined with the amount of fixed rate debt outstanding, the difference between the carryingamount of debt and its fair value is insignificant.

ITEM 8. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA

The financial statements of the Company at December 31, 2006 and 2005 and for the years ended December 31,2006, 2005 and 2004 and the report of Ernst & Young LLP, Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm, thereon and the related financial statement schedule, are included elsewhere herein. Reference is made to the Index to Consolidated Financial Statements and Schedules in Item 15.

ITEM 9. CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING ANDFINANCIAL DISCLOSURE

Not Applicable.

46

ITEM 9A. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES

Management’s Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures

The Company maintains disclosure controls and procedures as defined in SEC Rule 13a-15(e) that are designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed in its reports under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 isprocessed, recorded, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the SEC’s rules and forms and that such information is accumulated and communicated to management, including the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, as appropriate, to allow for timely decisions regarding required disclosure. In designing and evaluating the disclosure controls and procedures, management recognizes that any controls and procedures, nomatter how well designed and operated, can provide only reasonable assurance of achieving the desired controlobjectives, and management necessarily applies its judgment in evaluating the cost-benefit relationship of possiblecontrols and procedures.

As required by SEC Rule 13a-15(b), the Company carried out an evaluation, under the supervision and with theparticipation of management including the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, of the effectivenessof the design and operation of the disclosure controls and procedures as of December 31, 2006. Based on theforegoing, the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer concluded, as of that time, that the Company’stdisclosure controls and procedures were effective at the reasonable assurance level.

There was no change in the Company’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the threemonths ended December 31, 2006 that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the Company’s internal control over financial reporting. The Company may make changes in its internal controlprocesses from time to time in the future.

Management’s Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting

Management of the Company is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting as defined in Rule 13a-15(f) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The Company’s internal control over financial reporting is designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financialreporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles.

Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Therefore, even those systems determined to be effective can provide only reasonable assurance with respect to financial statement preparation and presentation.

Management assessed the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2006 using the criteria set forth in Internal Control — Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission. Based on this assessment, management believes that, as of December 31, 2006, the Company’s internal control over financial reporting was effective based on those criteria.rr

Management’s assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2006, has been audited by Ernst & Young LLP, the independent registered public accounting firm who also audited the Company’s consolidated financial statements. Ernst & Young LLP’s report on management’s assessment of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting appears below.

47

REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

To the Board of Directors and Shareholders of PS Business Parks, Inc.

We have audited management’s assessment, included in the accompanying Management’s Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting, that PS Business Parks, Inc. (the Company) maintained effective internal controlover financial reporting as of December 31, 2006, based on criteria established in Internal Control — Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (the COSO criteria). PS Business Parks, Inc.’s management is responsible for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on management’s assessment and an opinion on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting based on our audit.

We conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all material respects. Our audit included obtaining an understanding of internal control over financial reporting, evaluating management’sassessment, testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control, and performing suchother procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.

A company’s internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes inaccordance with generally accepted accounting principles. A company’s internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (1) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail,accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (2)f provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordancewith generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company are being madeonly in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the company; and (3) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the company’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.

Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

In our opinion, management’s assessment that PS Business Parks, Inc. maintained effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2006, is fairly stated, in all material respects, based on the COSO criteria.Also, in our opinion, PS Business Parks, Inc. maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2006, based on the COSO criteria.

We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the consolidated balance sheets of PS Business Parks, Inc. as of December 31, 2006 and 2005, and the related consolidated statements of income, shareholders’ equity, and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2006 of PS Business Parks, Inc. and our report dated February 23, 2007 expressed anunqualified opinion thereon.

/s/ Ernst & Young LLP

Los Angeles, CaliforniaFebruary 23, 2007

48

ITEM 9B. OTHER INFORMATION

None.

PART III

ITEM 10. DIRECTORS, EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCES

The information required by this item with respect to directors is hereby incorporated by reference to the material appearing in the Company’s definitive proxy statement to be filed in connection with the annualshareholders’ meeting to be held in 2007 (the “Proxy Statement”) under the caption “Election of Directors”

Information required by this item with respect to executive officers is provided in Item 4A of this report. See“Executive Officers of the Registrant.”

Information required by this item with respect to the nominating process, the audit committee and the audit committee financial expert is hereby incorporated by reference to the material appearing in the Proxy Statement under the caption “Corporate Governance.”

Information required by this item with respect to a code of ethics is hereby incorporated by reference to therrmaterial appearing in the Proxy Statement under the caption “Corporate Governance.” We have adopted a code of ethics that applies to our principal executive officer, principal financial officer and principal accounting officer, which is available on our website at www.psbusinessparks.com. The information contained on the Company’s website is not a part of, or incorporated by reference into, this Annual Report on Form 10-K. Any amendments to or waivers of the code of ethics granted to the Company’s executive officers or the controller will be published promptly on our website or by other appropriate means in accordance with SEC rules.

Information required by this item with respect to the compliance with Section 16(a) is hereby incorporated by reference to the material appearing in the Proxy Statement under the caption “Section 16(a) Beneficial OwnershipReporting Compliance”

ITEM 11. EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

The information required by this item is hereby incorporated by reference to the material appearing in the ProxyStatement under the captions “Corporate Governance,” “Executive Compensation,” “Corporate Governance — Compensation Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation” and “Report of the Compensation Committee.”

49

ITEM 12. SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENTNN AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS

The information required by this item with respect to security ownership of certain beneficial owners and management is hereby incorporated by reference to the material appearing in the Proxy Statement under the captions“Stock Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management.”

The following table sets forth information as of December 31, 2006 on the Company’s equity compensation plans:

Plan Category

(a) Number of Securities

to be Issued Upon Exercise of

Outstanding Options, Warrants,

andRights

(b)WeightedAverage

Exercise Price of Outstanding

Options,Warrants, and

Rights

(c)Number of Securities

Remaining Available forFuture Issuance underEquity Compensation

Plans (ExcludingSecurities Reflected in

Column(a))Equity compensation plans approved by security holders ................................... 816,171 $ 42.05 1,307,011 Equity compensation plans not approved by security holders.................... — $ —— ——Total......................................................... 816,171* $ 42.05* 1,307,011*

____________* Amounts include restricted stock units

ITEM 13. CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS, AND DIRECTOR INDEPENDENCE

The information required by this item is hereby incorporated by reference to the material appearing in the ProxyStatement under the captions “Corporate Governance” and “Certain Relationships and Related Transactions.”

ITEM 14. PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTANT FEES AND SERVICES

Audit Fees: Audit fees include fees generated by all services performed by Ernst & Young LLP to comply with generally accepted auditing standards or for services related to the audit and review of the Company’s financialstatements. Audit fees billed (or expected to be billed) to the Company by Ernst & Young LLP for audit of the Company’s consolidated financial statements and internal control over financial reporting, review of theconsolidated financial statements included in the Company’s quarterly reports on Form 10-Q and services inconnection with the Company’s registration statements and securities offerings totaled $382,000 for 2006 and $322,000 for 2005.

Audit-Related Fees: Audit related fees representing professional fees provided by Ernst & Young LLP inconnection with the audit of the Company’s 401(K) savings plan and property acquisition audits totaled $53,000 for 2006. During 2005, Ernst & Young LLP did not bill the Company for audit related services

Tax Fees: Tax fees billed (or expected to be billed) to the Company by Ernst & Young LLP for tax complianceand consulting services totaled $149,000 for 2006 and $165,000 for 2005.

All Other Fees: During 2006 and 2005, Ernst & Young LLP did not bill the Company for any services other than audit, audit-related and tax services.

The Audit Committee of the Company approves in advance all services performed by Ernst & Young LLP. TheAudit Committee has delegated pre-approval authority to the Chairman of the Audit Committee provided that theChairman shall report any pre-approval decisions to the Audit Committee at its next scheduled meeting.

50

PART IV

ITEM 15. EXHIBITS AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES

a. 1. Financial Statements

The financial statements listed in the accompanying Index to Consolidated Financial Statements and Schedules are filed as part of this report.

2. Financial Statements Schedule

The financial statements schedule listed in the accompanying Index to Consolidated Financial Statements and Schedules are filed as part of this report.

3. Exhibits

The exhibits listed in the Exhibit Index immediately preceding such exhibits are filed with or incorporated by reference in this report.

b. Exhibits

The exhibits listed in the Exhibit Index immediately preceding such exhibits are filed with or incorporated by reference in this report.

c. Financial Statement Schedules

Not applicable.

51

PS BUSINESS PARKS, INC.

INDEX TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SCHEDULES(Item 15(a)(1) and Item 15(a)(2))

Page Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm................................................................................. 52Consolidated balance sheets as of December 31, 2006 and 2005......................................................................... 53Consolidated statements of income for the years ended December 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004 ............................. 54Consolidated statements of shareholders’ equity for the years ended December 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004......... 55Consolidated statements of cash flows for the years ended December 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004 ........................ 56 Notes to consolidated financial statements ........................................................................................................... 58Schedule:III — Real estate and accumulated depreciation .................................................................................................. 74

All other schedules have been omitted since the required information is not present or not present in amountssufficient to require submission of the schedule, or because the information required is included in the consolidated financial statements or notes thereto.

52

REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

To the Board of Directors and Shareholders of PS Business Parks, Inc.

We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of PS Business Parks, Inc. as of December 31, 2006 and 2005, and the related consolidated statements of income, shareholders’ equityf , and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2006. Our audits also included the financial statement schedulelisted in the Index at Item 15(a). These financial statements and financial statement schedule are the responsibility of the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements and financialstatement schedule based on our audits.

We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the consolidated financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a aatest basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includesassessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, theconsolidated financial position of PS Business Parks, Inc. at December 31, 2006 and 2005, and the consolidated results of their operations and their cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2006, in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles. Also, in our opinion, the related financial statement schedule, when considered in relation to the basic financial statements taken as a whole, presents fairly in allmaterial respects the information set forth therein.

We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the effectiveness of PS Business Parks, Inc.’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2006, based on criteria established in Internal Control — Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission and our report dated February 23, 2007expressed an unqualified opinion thereon.

/s/ Ernst & Young LLP

Los Angeles, California February 23, 2007

PS BUSINESS PARKS, INC.

See accompanying notes.

53

CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS

December 31, 2006 2005

(In thousands, except share data)

ASSETS

Cash and cash equivalents ........................................................................................... $ 66,282 $ 200,447 Real estate facilities, at cost: Land ........................................................................................................................... 439,777 383,308 Buildings and equipment ........................................................................................... 1,353,442 1,189,815

1,793,219 1,573,123Accumulated depreciation ......................................................................................... (441,336) (355,228)

1,351,883 1,217,895Properties held for disposition, net .............................................................................. — 5,366Land held for development.......................................................................................... 9,011 9,011

1,360,894 1,232,272Rent receivable ............................................................................................................ 2,080 2,678 Deferred rent receivables............................................................................................. 21,454 a 18,650Other assets.................................................................................................................. 12,154 9,631

Total assets ............................................................................................................ $ 1,462,864 $ 1,463,678LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY

Accrued and other liabilitiesa ........................................................................................ $ 42,394 $ 39,126Preferred stock called for redemption.......................................................................... 50,000 — Mortgage notes payable............................................................................................... 67,048 25,893

Total liabilities ........................................................................................................ 159,442 65,019Minority interests:

Preferred units ......................................................................................................... 82,750 135,750 Common units ......................................................................................................... 165,469 169,451

Commitments and Contingencies Shareholders’ equity: Preferred stock, $0.01 par value, 50,000,000 shares authorized, 22,900 and 23,734 shares issued and outstanding at December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively ............................................................. 572,500 593,350

Common stock, $0.01 par value, 100,000,000 shares authorized,21,311,005 and 21,560,593 shares issued and outstanding at December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively ............................................................. 213 215

Paid-in capital ............................................................................................................ 398,048 407,380 Cumulative net income .............................................................................................. 483,403 418,823 Cumulative distributions............................................................................................ (398,961) (326,310)

Total shareholders’ equity....................................................................................... 1,055,203 1,093,458Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity............................................................... $ 1,462,864 $ 1,463,678

PS BUSINESS PARKS, INC.

See accompanying notes.

54

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME

For the Years Ended December 31, 2006 2005 2004 (In thousands, except per share data)

Revenues: Rental income ........................................................................................... $ 242,214 $ 219,604 $ 210,937Facility management fees ......................................................................... 625 579 624Total operating revenues........................................................................... 242,839 220,183 211,561

Expenses: Cost of operations ..................................................................................... 74,671 65,712 62,994 Depreciation and amortization.................................................................. 86,216 76,178 69,942 General and administrative ....................................................................... 7,046 5,843 4,628Total operating expenses .......................................................................... 167,933 147,733 137,564

Other income and expenses: Interest and other income.......................................................................... 6,874 4,888 406Interest expense ........................................................................................ (2,575) (1,330) (3,054)Total other income and expenses .............................................................. 4,299 3,558 (2,648)

Asset impairment due to casualty loss........................................................ — 72 — Income from continuing operations before minority interests.................... 79,205 75,936 71,349Minority interests in continuing operations: Minority interest in income — preferred units Distributions to preferred unit holders .................................................... (9,789) (10,350) (17,106) Redemption of preferred operating partnership units.............................. (1,366) (301) (3,139)

Minority interest in income — common units .......................................... (5,113) (5,611) (4,540)Total minority interests in continuing operations ..................................... (16,268) (16,262) (24,785)

Income from continuing operations............................................................ 62,937 59,674 46,564Discontinued operations: Income (loss) from discontinued operations ............................................. (125) 2,769 5,337Gain on disposition of real estate.............................................................. 2,328 18,109 15,462Minority interest in income attributable to discontinued operations — common units ................................................................... (560) (5,258) (5,220)

Income from discontinued operations....................................................... 1,643 15,620 15,579Net Income ................................................................................................. 64,580 75,294 62,143Net income allocable to preferred shareholders: Preferred stock distributions Preferred stock distributions ................................................................... 44,553 43,011 31,154 Redemptions of preferred stock .............................................................. 3,380 — 1,866—

Total preferred stock distributions ............................................................ 47,933 43,011 33,020Net income allocable to common shareholders .......................................... $ 16,647 $ 32,283 $ 29,123

Net income per common share — basic: Continuing operations............................................................................... $ 0.70 $ 0.76 $ 0.62 Discontinued operations ........................................................................... $ 0.08 $ 0.72 $ 0.72 Net income................................................................................................ $ 0.78 $ 1.48 $ 1.34

Net income per common share — diluted: Continuing operations............................................................................... $ 0.69 $ 0.76 $ 0.62 Discontinued operations ........................................................................... $ 0.08 $ 0.71 $ 0.71 Net income................................................................................................ $ 0.77 $ 1.47 $ 1.33

Weighted average common shares outstanding: Basic ......................................................................................................... 21,335 21,826 21,767Diluted ...................................................................................................... 21,646 22,018 21,960

PS B

USI

NES

S PA

RK

S, IN

C.

See

acco

mpa

nyin

g no

tes.

55

CO

NSO

LID

AT

ED

ST

ATE

ME

NT

S O

F SH

AR

EH

OLD

ER

S’ E

QU

ITY

Cum

ulat

ive

Oth

erPr

efer

red

Stoc

k

C

omm

on S

tock

Paid

-in

N

et

Com

preh

ensi

ve C

umul

ativ

e S

hare

hold

ers’

Shar

es

A

mou

nt

Shar

es

Am

ount

C

apita

l

In

com

e

Inc

ome/

(Los

s)

Dis

trib

utio

ns

E

quity

(In

thou

sand

s, ex

cept

shar

e da

ta)

Bal

ance

s at D

ecem

ber

31, 2

003.

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

.....

6,

747

$ 16

8,67

3 21

,565

,528

$

216

$ 42

0,77

8 $

281,

386

$

(5

35)

$ (1

99,6

90)

$ 67

0,82

8Is

suan

ce o

f pre

ferr

ed st

ock,

net

of c

osts

......

......

......

......

......

.....

15

,800

395,

000

—

—

(13,

870)

—

—

—

381,

130

Re d

empt

ion

of p

refe

rred

stoc

k...

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

....

(2

,113

)

(52,

823)

—

—

1,

866

—

—

(1

,866

) (5

2,82

3)

Exer

cise

of s

tock

opt

ions

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

....

—

—

269,

710

2

6,

956

—

—

—

6,95

8St

ock

com

pens

atio

n...

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

...

—

—

4,

429

—

1,36

5

—

—

—

1,36

5 Sh

elf r

egis

tratio

n....

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

.

—

—

—

—

(1

01)

—

—

—

(1

01)

Com

preh

ensi

ve in

com

e:

C

hang

e in

unr

ealiz

ed lo

ss o

n in

tere

st ra

te sw

ap...

......

......

......

—

—

——

—

—

535

—

535

Net

inco

me.

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

.....

——

——

—62

,143

—

—

62,1

43C

ompr

ehen

sive

inco

me.

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

62,6

78D

istri

butio

ns:

Pref

erre

d st

ock.

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

.....

—

—

——

——

—

(3

1,15

4)

(3

1,15

4)C

omm

on st

ock.

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

.....

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

(25,

274)

(2

5,27

4)A

djus

tmen

t to

min

ority

inte

rest

s und

erly

ing

owne

rshi

p....

......

—

——

——

——

3,35

7—

——

——

—

3,

357

—B

alan

ces a

t Dec

embe

r 31

, 200

4....

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

..20

,434

510,

850

21,8

39,6

67

21

8

420,

351

34

3,52

9

—

(2

57,9

84)

1,

016,

964

Issu

ance

of p

refe

rred

stoc

k, n

et o

f cos

ts...

......

......

......

......

......

..

3,30

0

82,5

00

—

—

(2

,873

)

—

—

—

79

,627

R

epur

chas

e of

com

mon

stoc

k....

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

.....

—

—

(3

61,4

00)

(4

)

(16,

628)

—

—

—

(1

6,63

2)Ex

erci

se o

f sto

ck o

ptio

ns...

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

.

—

—

70

,364

1

1,93

6

—

—

—

1,

937

Stoc

k co

mpe

nsat

ion

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

—

—

11

,962

—

2,

588

—

—

—

2,

588

Net

inco

me.

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

.—

—

—

—

—

75

,294

—

—

75,2

94D

istri

butio

ns:

Pref

erre

d st

ock.

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

.....

—

——

——

—

—

(43,

011)

(43,

011)

Com

mon

stoc

k....

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

.. —

—

—

—

—

—

—

(2

5,31

5)

(2

5,31

5)A

djus

tmen

t to

min

ority

inte

rest

s und

erly

ing

owne

rshi

p....

......

—

—

—

—

—

——

2,00

6—

—

——

——

2,00

6—

Bal

ance

s at D

ecem

ber

31, 2

005.

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

.....

23,7

34

59

3,35

0 21

,560

,593

21

5 40

7,38

0

418,

823

—

(3

26,3

10)

1,

093,

458

Issu

ance

of p

refe

rred

stoc

k, n

et o

f cos

ts...

......

......

......

......

......

..

3,80

0

95,0

00

—

—

(2

,798

)

—

—

—

92

,202

R

edem

ptio

n of

pre

ferr

ed st

ock

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

.

(2,6

34)

(6

5,85

0)

—

—

1,65

8

—

—

(1,6

58)

(65,

850)

Pref

erre

d st

ock

calle

d fo

r red

empt

ion.

......

......

......

......

......

......

..

(2,0

00)

(5

0,00

0)

—

—

1,

722

—

—

(1

,722

)

(50,

000)

R

epur

c has

e of

com

mon

stoc

k....

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

.....

—

—

(3

09,1

00)

(3

)

(16,

114)

—

—

—

(16,

117)

Exer

cise

of s

tock

opt

ions

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

....

—

—

37

,900

1

1,36

6

—

—

—

1,

367

Stoc

k co

mpe

nsat

ion

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

—

—

21,6

12

—

2,28

6

—

—

—

2,28

6N

et in

com

e....

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

....

—

—

—

—

—

64,5

80

—

—

64

,580

Dis

tribu

tions

:Pr

efer

red

stoc

k....

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

..

—

——

——

—

—

(4

4,55

3)

(4

4,55

3)C

omm

on st

ock.

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

.....

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

(2

4,71

8)

(2

4,71

8)A

djus

tmen

t to

min

ority

inte

rest

s und

erly

ing

owne

rshi

p....

......

—

—

—

—

—

——

2,54

8—

—

——

——

2,54

8—

Bal

ance

s at D

ecem

ber

31, 2

006.

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

.....

22,9

00$

572,

500

21,3

11,0

05

$

213

$ 39

8,04

8 $

483,

403

$

—

$ (3

98,9

61—

) $

1,05

5,20

3

PS BUSINESS PARKS, INC.

See accompanying notes.

56

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS

For the Years Ended December 31,2006 2005 2004

(In thousands) Cash flows from operating activities:Net income............................................................................................. $ 64,580 $ 75,294 $ 62,143Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by

operating activities: Depreciation and amortization expense ............................................... 86,243 77,420 73,793In-place lease adjustment ..................................................................... 232 155 156 Lease incentives net of tenant improvement reimbursements.............. 440 144 — Amortization of mortgage premium..................................................... (76) — — Minority interest in income.................................................................. 16,828 21,520 30,005 Gain on disposition of properties ......................................................... (2,328) (18,109) (15,462)Impairment of assets from casualty loss .............................................. — 72 — mStock compensation expense................................................................ 2,845 1,060 914Increase in receivables and other assets ............................................... (3,741) (5,004) (4,172)Increase (decrease) in accrued and other liabilities.............................. 492a (3,124) 4,581

Total adjustments............................................................................. 100,935 74,134 89,815Net cash provided by operating activities .......................................... 165,515 149,428 151,958

Cash flows from investing activities:Capital improvements to real estate facilities....................................... (39,227) (40,340) (52,069) Acquisition of real estate facilities ....................................................... (138,973) (20,073) (22,323) Proceeds from disposition of real estate............................................... 7,714 84,802 48,284Insurance proceeds from casualty loss ................................................. 500 — ——Net cash (used in) provided by investing activities ............................ (169,986) 24,389 (26,108)

Cash flows from financing activities: Borrowings on credit facility ............................................................... — — 138,000Repayments of borrowings on credit facility ....................................... — — (233,000) Repayment of borrowings from an affiliate ......................................... — — (100,000) Principal payments on mortgage notes payable ................................... (762) (472) (8,327)Repayment of unsecured notes payable ............................................... — — (50,000) Net proceeds from the issuance of preferred stock .............................. 92,448 79,627 381,130Net proceeds from the issuance of preferred units ...............................ff — 19,465 41,533 Exercise of stock options ..................................................................... 1,367 1,937 6,958Shelf registration costs ......................................................................... — — (101) Repurchase of common stock .............................................................. (16,117) (14,465) — Redemption of preferred units ............................................................. (53,000) (12,000) (132,750) Redemption of preferred stock............................................................. (65,850) — (52,823) Distributions paid to preferred shareholders ........................................ (44,799) (43,011) (31,154) Distributions paid to minority interests — preferred units................... (9,789) (10,350) (17,689)ffDistributions paid to common shareholders......................................... (24,718) (25,315) (25,274) Distributions paid to minority interests — common units ................... (8,474) (8,474) (8,474)Net cash used in financing activities .................................................. (129,694) (13,058) (91,971)

Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents .............................. (134,165) 160,759 33,879 Cash and cash equivalents at the beginning of the period ....................... 200,447 39,688 5,809Cash and cash equivalents at the end of the period.................................. $ 66,282 $ 200,447 $ 39,688Supplemental disclosures:

Interest paid, net of interest capitalized................................................ $ 2,575 $ 1,330 $ 3,434

PS BUSINESS PARKS, INC.

See accompanying notes.

57

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS

For the Years Ended December 31, 2006 2005 2004

(In thousands)Supplemental schedule of non cash investing and financing activities:Adjustment to minority interest to underlying ownership: Minority interest — common units............................................................... $ 1,182 $ 2,240 $ 218 Paid-in capital ............................................................................................... $ (1,182) $ (2,240) $ (218)

Effect of EITF Topic D-42 Cumulative distributions............................................................................... $ 3,380 $ — $ 1,866Minority interest — common units............................................................... $ 1,366 $ 301 $ 3,139 Paid-in capital ............................................................................................... $ (4,746) $ (301) $ (5,005)

Mortgage note payable assumed in property acquisition: Real estate facilitiesff ...................................................................................... $ 41,993 $ 14,998 $ — Mortgage notes payable ................................................................................ $ (41,993) $ (14,998) $ —

Accrued lease inducements: Other assets................................................................................................... $ — $ 1,985 $ —Accrued and other liabilities ......................................................................... $ — $ (1,985) $ —

Accrued stock repurchase: Paid-in capital $ — $ 2,167 $ — Accrued and other liabilities ......................................................................... $ — $ (2,167) $ —

Unrealized loss: Comprehensive (income) loss on interest rate swap ..................................... $ — $ — $ 535 Other comprehensive income (loss).............................................................. $ — $ — $ (535)

PS BUSINESS PARKS, INC.

58

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

DECEMBER 31, 2006

1. Organization and description of business

Organization

PS Business Parks, Inc. (“PSB”) was incorporated in the state of California in 1990. As of December 31, 2006, PSB owned approximately 75% of the common partnership units of PS Business Parks, L.P. (the “Operating Partnership” or “OP”). The remaining common partnership units were owned by Public Storage, Inc. (“PSI”). PSB,as the sole general partner of the Operating Partnership, has full, exclusive and complete responsibility and discretion in managing and controlling the Operating Partnership. PSB and the Operating Partnership are collectively referred to as the “Company.”

Description of business

The Company is a fully-integrated, self-advised and self-managed real estate investment trust (“REIT”) that ffacquires, develops, owns and operates commercial properties, primarily multi-tenant flex, office and industrialspace. As of December 31, 2006, the Company owned and operated approximately 18.7 million rentable square feet of commercial space located in eight states. The Company also manages approximately 1.4 million rentable squarefeet on behalf of PSI and its affiliated entities.

2. Summary of significant accounting policies

Basis of presentation

The accompanying consolidated financial statements include the accounts of PSB and the Operating Partnership.All significant inter-company balances and transactions have been eliminated in the consolidated financial statements.

Use of estimates

The preparation of the consolidated financial statements in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”) requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the amounts reported inthe consolidated financial statements and accompanying notes. Actual results could differ from estimates.

Allowance for doubtful accounts

We monitor the collectibility of our receivable balances including the deferred rent receivable on an on-goingbasis. Based on these reviews, we maintain an allowance for doubtful accounts for estimated losses resulting fromthe possible inability of our tenants to make required rent payments to us. A provision for doubtful accounts isrecorded during each period. The allowance for doubtful accounts, which represents the cumulative allowances lesswrite-offs of uncollectible rent, is netted against tenant and other receivables on our consolidated balance sheets.Tenant receivables are net of an allowance for uncollectible accounts totaling $300,000 at December 31, 2006 and 2005.

Financial instruments

The methods and assumptions used to estimate the fair value of financial instruments are described below. TheCompany has estimated the fair value of financial instruments using available market information and appropriate valuation methodologies. Considerable judgment is required in interpreting market data to develop estimates of market value. Accordingly, estimated fair values are not necessarily indicative of the amounts that could be realized in current market exchanges.

59

The Company considers all highly liquid investments with an original maturity of three months or less at the date of purchase to be cash equivalents. Due to the short period to maturity of the Company’s cash and cash equivalents,accounts receivable, other assets and accrued and other liabilities, the carrying values as presented on theconsolidated balance sheets are reasonable estimates of fair value. Based on borrowing rates currently available to the Company, the carrying amount of debt approximates fair value.

Financial assets that are exposed to credit risk consist primarily of cash and cash equivalents and receivables. Cash and cash equivalents, which consist primarily of short-term investments, including commercial paper, are onlyinvested in entities with an investment grade rating. Receivables are compriset d of balances due from a large number of customers. Balances that the Company expects to become uncollectable are reserved for or written off.

In June, 1998, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued Statement of Financial AccountingStandards (“SFAS”) No. 133 “Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities,” (SFAS No. 133, asamended by SFAS No. 138). The Statement requires the Company to recognize all derivatives on the balance sheet at fair value. Derivatives that are not hedges must be adjusted to fair value and reflected as income or expense. If thederivative is a hedge, depending on the nature of the hedge, changes in the fair value of derivatives are either offset against the change in fair value of the hedged assets, liabilities, or firm commitments through earnings or recognized in other comprehensive income until the hedged item is recognized in earnings. The ineffective portion of a derivative’s change in fair value is immediately recognized in earnings.

In July, 2002, the Operating Partnership entered into an interest rate swap agreement, which was accounted for as a cash flow hedge, in order to reduce the impact of changes in interest rates on a portion of its floating rate debt.The agreement, which covered $50.0 million of debt through July, 2004, effectively changed the interest rateexposure from floating rate to a fixed rate of 4.46%. Market gains and losses on the value of the swap were deferred and included in income over the life of the swap or related debt. The difference paid on the interest rate swap of $557,000 for the year ended December 31, 2004 was recorded in interest expense as incurred. For the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005, there were no interest differentials paid on the interest rate swap. Net interest differentials paid or received related to these contracts were accrued as incurred or earned. There was no unrealized dloss related to the interest rate swap included in other comprehensive income as of December 31, 2006 or 2005 as the swap agreement was eliminated in 2004.

Real estate facilities

Real estate facilities are recorded at cost. Costs related to the renovation or improvement of the properties are capitalized. Expenditures for repairs and maintenance are expensed as incurred. Expenditures that are expected tobenefit a period greater than 24 months and exceed $2,000 are capitalized and depreciated over the estimated usefullife. Buildings and equipment are depreciated on the straight-line method over the estimated useful lives, which aregenerally 30 and 5 years, respectively. Leasing costs in excess of $1,000 for leases with terms greater than two yearsare capitalized and depreciated over their estimated useful lives. Leasing costs for leases of less than two years or less than $1,000 are expensed as incurred.

Interest cost and property taxes incurred during the period of construction of real estate facilities are capitalized.fThe Company did not capitalize any interest expense in 2006, 2005 or 2004. The Company did not capitalized any property taxes during the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005. The Company capitalized $46,000 of property taxes during the year ended December 31, 2004.

Properties Held for Disposition

The Company accounts for properties held for disposition in accordance with SFAS No. 144, “Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets”. An asset is classified as an asset held for disposition when it meets the requirements of SFAS No. 144, which include, among other criteria, the approval of the sale of the asset, the asset has been marketed for sale and the Company expects that the sale will likely occur within the next twelve months. Upon classification of an asset as held for disposition, the net book value of the asset is included on thebalance sheet as properties held for disposition, depreciation of the asset is ceased and the operating results of the asset are included in discontinued operations.

60

Intangible assets

Intangible assets include above-market and below-market in-place lease values of acquired properties based onthe present value (using an interest rate which reflects the risks associated with the leases acquired) of the difference between (i) the contractual amounts to be paid pursuant to the in-place leases and (ii) management’s estimate of fair market lease rates for the corresponding in-place leases, measured over a period equal to the remaining non-cancelable term of the lease. The capitalized above-market and below-market lease values (included in other assetsin the accompanying consolidated balance sheet) are amortized, net, to rental income over the remaining non-cancelable terms of the respective leases. The Company amortized $232,000, $155,000 and $156,000 of intangible assets resulting from the above and below market lease values during the years ended December 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004, respectively. As of December 31, 2006, the value of in-place leases was $656,000, net of $535,000 of accumulated amortization. As of December 31, 2005, the value of in-place leases was $455,000, net of $304,000 of accumulated amortization.

Evaluation of asset impairment

The Company evaluates its assets used in operations by identifying indicators of impairment and by comparingthe sum of the estimated undiscounted future cash flows for each asset to the asset’s carrying value. When indicatorsof impairment are present and the sum of the undiscounted future cash flows is less than the carrying value of suchasset, an impairment loss is recorded equal to the difference between the asset’s current carrying value and its value based on discounting its estimated future cash flows. In addition, the Company evaluates its assets held for disposition for impairment. Assets held for disposition are reported at the lower of their carrying value or fair value, less cost of disposition. At December 31, 2006, the Company did not consider any assets to be impaired.

Asset impairment due to casualty loss

It is the Company’s policy to record as a casualty loss or gain, in the period the casualty occurs, the differentialbetween (a) the book value of assets destroyed and (b) any insurance proceeds that we expect to receive in accordance with our insurance contracts. Potential proceeds from insurance that are subject to any uncertainties,tsuch as interpretation of deductible provisions of the governing agreements, the estimation of costs of restoration, or other such items, are treated as contingent proceeds in accordance with SFAS No. 5, and not recorded until the uncertainties are satisfied.

For the year ended December 31, 2006, one of our real estate assets located in Southern California was damaged as a result of a fire. We have estimated that the costs to restore this facility will be approximately $392,000. Wehave third-party insurance, subject to certain deductibles, that covers restoration of physical damage and the loss of income due to the physical damage incurred. We expect our insurers to pay all of the costs associated with the fire.The net book value of the assets destroyed was approximately $266,000 combined with approximately $126,000 of non-capitalized expense incurred in 2006. Accordingly, no casualty loss was recorded for the year ended December 31, 2006.

For the year ended December 31, 2005, several of our real estate assets located in South Florida were damaged as a result of a series of hurricanes. We have estimated that the costs to restore these facilities will be approximately $2.3 million. We have third-party insurance, subject to certain deductibles, that covers restoration of physicaldamage and the loss of income due to the physical damage incurred. We expect our insurers to pay approximately $1.6 million of the physical damage, and the net book value of the assets destroyed was approximately $1.1 million combined with approximately $510,000 of non-capitalized expense incurred in 2005. Accordingly, we haverecorded a casualty loss of $72,000 for the year ended December 31, 2005. No material casualty losses were recorded for the year ended December 31, 2004.

These amounts are based upon estimates and are subject to change as we and our insurers (i) more fully evaluatethe extent of physical damage, which may not be fully determinable until commencement of repairs, (ii) developdetailed restoration plans and (iii) evaluate the impact of local conditions in the building labor and supplies markets for restoration costs.

61

Stock-based compensation

On December 16, 2004, the FASB issued SFAS No. 123 (revised 2004), “Share-Based Payment,” which is arevision of FASB Statement No. 123, “Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation.” SFAS No. 123(R) supersedes APB Opinion No. 25, “Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees,” and amends SFAS No. 95, “Statement of Cash Flows.” Generally, the approach in SFAS No. 123(R) is similar to the approach described in SFAS No. 123. However, SFAS No. 123(R) requires all share-based payments to employees, including grants of employee stockoptions, to be recognized in the income statement based on their fair values. Effective January 1, 2006, the Company adopted SFAS No. 123(R) using the modified prospective method. Due to the Company adopting the Fair Value Method of accounting for stock options effective January 1, 2002, the adoption of this standard did not have a material impact on the results of operations or the financial position of the Company. See Note 10.

Revenue and expense recognition

Revenue is recognized in accordance with Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 104 of the Securities and ExchangeCommission, Revenue Recognition in Financial Statements (“SAB 104”). SAB 104 requires that four basic criteriamust be met before revenue can be recognized: persuasive evidence of an arrangement exists; the delivery hasoccurred or services rendered; the fee is fixed and determinable; and collectibility is reasonably assured. All leasesare classified as operating leases. Rental income is recognized on a straight-line basis over the terms of the leases.Straight-line rent is recognized for all tenants with contractual increases in rent that are not included on theCompany’s credit watch list. Deferred rent receivables represent rental revenue recognized on a straight-line basis inexcess of billed rents. Reimbursements from tenants for real estate taxes and other recoverable operating expensesare recognized as revenues in the period the applicable costs are incurred.

Costs incurred in connection with leasing (primarily tenant improvements and leasing commissions) arecapitalized and amortized over the lease period.

Gains/Losses from sales of real estate

The Company recognizes gains from sales of real estate at the time of sale using the full accrual method,provided that various criteria related to the terms of the transactions and any subsequent involvement by us with the properties sold are met. If the criteria are not met, the Company defers the gains and recognizes them when thecriteria are met or using the installment or cost recovery methods as appropriate under the circumstances.

General and administrative expense

General and administrative expense includes executive compensation, office expense, professional fees, stateincome taxes, cost of acquisition personnel and other such administrative items.

Related party transactions

Pursuant to a cost sharing and administrative services agreement, the Company shares costs with PSI and affiliated entities for certain administrative services. These costs totaled $320,000, $335,000 and $327,000 for the years ended December 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004, respectively. In addition, the Company provides propertymanagement services for properties owned by PSI and its affiliates for a fee of 5% of the gross revenues of suchproperties in addition to reimbursement of direct costs. These management fee revenues recognized under management contracts with affiliated parties totaled $625,000, $579,000 and $562,000 for the years ended December 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004, respectively. In December of 2006, the Company bought two properties in Palm Beach County, Florida, portions of which will be managed by PSI. As of December 31, 2006 and 2005, the Company has amounts due from PSI of $871,000 and $551,000, respectively, for these contracts, as well as for amounts paid by the Company on behalf of PSI.

62

Income taxes

The Company qualified and intends to continue to qualify as a REIT, as defined in Section 856 of the Internal Revenue Code. As a REIT, the Company is not subject to federal income tax to the extent that it distributes itstaxable income to its shareholders. A REIT must distribute at least 90% of its taxable income each year. In addition,REITs are subject to a number of organizational and operating requirements. If the Company fails to qualify as a REIT in any taxable year, the Company will be subject to federal income tax (including any applicable alternativeminimum tax) based on its taxable income using corporate income tax rates. Even if the Company qualifies for taxation as a REIT, the Company may be subject to certain state and local taxes on its income and property and to federal income and excise taxes on its undistributed taxable income. The Company believes it met all organization and operating requirements to maintain its REIT status during 2006, 2005 and 2004 and intends to continue to meetsuch requirements. Accordingly, no provision for income taxes has been made in the accompanying financialstatements.

Accounting for preferred equity issuance costs

In accordance with Emerging Issues Task Force (“EITF”) Topic D-42, the Company records its issuance costs as a reduction to paid-in capital on its balance sheet at the time the preferred securities are issued and reflects thecarrying value of the preferred stock at the stated value. The Company reducest the carrying value of preferred stock by the issuance costs at the time it notifies the holders of preferred stock or units of its intent to redeem such sharesor units.

Net income per common share

Per share amounts are computed using the weighted average common shares outstanding. “Diluted” weighted average common shares outstanding include the dilutive effect of stock options and restricted stock units under the treasury stock method. “Basic” weighted average common shares outstanding excludes such effect. Earnings per share has been calculated as follows for the years ended December 31, (in thousands, except per share data):

2006 2005 2004 Net income allocable to common shareholders..................... $ 16,647 $ 32,283 $ 29,123Weighted average common shares outstanding: Basic weighted average common shares outstanding ......... 21,335 21,826 21,767 Net effect of dilutive stock compensation — based on

treasury stock method using average market price............ 311 192 193Diluted weighted average common shares outstanding ...... 21,646 22,018 21,960

Net income per common share — Basic............................... $ 0.78 $ 1.48 $ 1.34Net income per common share — Diluted............................ $ 0.77 $ 1.47 $ 1.33

Options to purchase approximately 20,000, 80,000 and 80,000 shares for the years ended December 31 2006,2005 and 2004, respectively, were not included in the computation of diluted net income per share because such options were considered anti-dilutive.

Segment Reporting

The Company views its operations as one segment.

Reclassifications

Certain reclassifications have been made to the consolidated financial statements for 2005 and 2004 in order to conform to the 2006 presentation.

63

3. Real estate facilities

The activity in real estate facilities for the years ended December 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004 is as follows (inthousands):

Land BuildingsAccumulatedDepreciation Total

Balances at December 31, 2003 .......... $ 363,719 $ 1,066,252 $ (207,546) $ 1,222,425Acquisition of real estate ................... 4,669 19,419 — 24,088Disposition of real estate ................... — (2,063) 1,046 (1,017) Capital improvements, net ................. — 49,933 — 49,933 Depreciation expense......................... — — (73,793) (73,793) Transfer to properties held for

Disposition....................................... — (1,136— ) 1,217 81Balances at December 31, 2004 .......... 368,388 1,132,405 (279,076) 1,221,717Acquisition of real estate ................... 15,129 20,054 — 35,183Disposition of real estate ................... — (1,526) 1,135 (391)Asset impairment due to

casualty loss..................................... — (1,135) — (1,135) Capital improvements, net ................. — 40,132 — 40,132 Depreciation expense......................... — — (77,420) (77,420) Transfer to properties held for

Disposition....................................... (209) (115) 133 (191)Balances at December 31, 2005 .......... 383,308 1,189,815 (355,228) 1,217,895Acquisition of real estate ................... 56,469 124,774 — 181,243 Disposition of real estate ................... — — 27 27Asset impairment due to

casualty loss..................................... — (374) 108 (266)Capital improvements, net ................. — 39,227 — 39,227 Depreciation expense......................... — —— (86,243— ) (86,243)

Balances at December 31, 2006 .......... $ 439,777 $ 1,353,442 $ (441,336) $ 1,351,883

The unaudited basis of real estate facilities for federal income tax purposes was approximately $1.3 billion at December 31, 2006. The Company had approximately 9.0% of its properties, in terms of net book value, encumbered by mortgage debt at December 31, 2006.

Subsequent to December 31, 2006, the Company acquired Overlake Business Center, a 493,000 square foot multi-tenant office and flex business park located in Redmond, Washington, for $76.0 million, including transaction costs.

On February 8, 2006, the Company acquired: WesTech Business Park, a 366,000 square foot office and flex park in Silver Spring, Maryland, for $69.3 million. On June 14, 2006 the Company acquired four multi-tenant flexbuildings, aggregating 88,800 square feet, located in Signal Hill, California, for $10.7 million. On June 20, 2006 the Company acquired Beaumont at Lafayette, a 107,300 square foot multi-tenant flex park in Chantilly, Virginia, for $15.8 million. On June 29, 2006 the Company acquired Meadows Corporate Park, a 165,000 square foot multi-tenant office park in Silver Spring, Maryland, for $29.9 million. In connection with the acquisition, the Company assumed a $16.8 million mortgage which bears interest at a fixed rate of 7.20% through November, 2011 at which time it can be prepaid without penalty. On October 27, 2006 the Company acquired Rogers Avenue, a multi-tenant industrial and flex park, aggregating 66,500 square feet, located in San Jose, California, for $8.4 million. OnDecember 8, 2006, the Company acquired Boca Commerce Park and Wellington Commerce Park, two multi-tenant flex parks, aggregating 398,000 square feet, located in Palm Beach County, Florida, for a combined price of $46.2million. In addition, in connection with the Palm Beach County purchases, the Company assumed three mortgageswith a combined total of $23.8 million with a weighted average fixed interest rate of 5.84%.

On October 25, 2005, the Company acquired a 233,000 square foot multi-tenant flex space in San Diego,California, for $35.1 million. In connection with the acquisition, the Company assumed a $15.0 million mortgagewhich bears interest at a fixed rate of 5.73%.

64

On May 27, 2004, the Company acquired Fairfax Executive Park, a 165,000 square foot office complex in Fairfax, Virginia, for $24.1 million.

The following table summarizes the assets and liabilities acquired during the years ended December 31, (inthousands):

2006 2005 2004Land........................................................................................................................... $ 56,469 $ 15,129 $ 4,669Buildings.................................................................................................................... 124,774 20,054 19,419In-place leases............................................................................................................ 433 — —Total purchase price................................................................................................... 181,676 35,183 24,088Mortgages assumed ................................................................................................... (41,993) (14,998) —Net operating assets and liabilities acquired.............................................................. (710) (112) (1,765)Total cash paid........................................................................................................... $ 138,973 $ 20,073 $ 22,323

In accordance with SFAS No. 141, Business Combinations, the purchase price of acquired properties is allocated to land, buildings and equipment and identified tangible and intangible assets and liabilities associated with in-place leases (including tenant improvements, unamortized leasing commissions, value of above-market and below-market leases, acquired in-place lease values, and tenant relationships, if any) based on their respective estimated fair values.

The fair value of the tangible assets of the acquired properties considers the value of the properties as if vacant asof the acquisition date. Management must make significant assumptions in determining the value of assets and liabilities acquired. Using different assumptions in the allocation of the purchase cost of the acquired propertieswould affect the timing of recognition of the related revenue and expenses. Amounts allocated to land are derived from comparable sales of land within the same region. Amounts allocated to buildings and improvements, tenant improvements and unamortized leasing commissions are based on current market replacement costs and other market rate information. The amount allocated to acquired in-place leases is determined based on management’s assessment of current market conditions and the estimated lease-up periods for the respective spaces.

In the first quarter of 2006, the Company sold three units aggregating 25,300 square feet at Miami International Commerce Center (“MICC”) for a gross sales price of $2.9 million, resulting in a gain of $711,000. In May, 2006,the Company sold a 30,500 square foot building located in Beaverton, Oregon, for a gross sales price of $4.4 million, resulting in a gain of $1.5 million. Also, in May, 2006, the Company sold a 7,100 square foot unit at MICCfor a gross sales price of $815,000, resulting in a gain of $154,000.

In January, 2005, the Company closed on the sale of 8.2 acres of land within the Cornell Oaks project in Beaverton, Oregon. The sales price for the land was $3.6 million, resulting in a gain of $1.8 million. During the second quarter, the Company closed on the sale of a 7,100 square foot unit at MICC for $750,000, resulting in a gain of $137,000. On February 15, 2005, the Company sold a 56,000 square foot retail center located at MICC. The sales price was $12.2 million, resulting in a gain of $967,000. In addition, on January 20, 2005, the Company closed on the sale of a 7,100 square foot unit at MICC for $740,000, resulting in a gain of $142,000. During the third quarter,the Company completed the sale of Woodside Corporate Park located in Beaverton, Oregon. The park consists of 13dbuildings comprising 574,000 square feet and a 3.3 acre parcel of land. Net proceeds from the sale, after transactioncosts, were $64.5 million. In connection with the sale, the Company recognized a gain of $12.5 million. During thefourth quarter, the Company also sold four units at MICC aggregating 30,200 square feet and a 13,000 square foot parcel of land with a combined gross sales price of $4.3 million. In connection with the sales, the Company recognized gains of $1.6 million.

The Company realized a gain of $1.0 million from the November 2004 sale of Largo 95 in Largo, Maryland. The gain was previously deferred due to the Company’s obligation to complete certain leasing related items satisfiedduring the second quarter of 2005.

In April, 2004, the Company sold a 43,000 square foot flex facility in Austin, Texas, for net proceeds of $1.1 million. During the third quarter of 2004, the Company sold a 30,500 square foot building in Beaverton, Oregon, for gross proceeds of $3.1 million and closed on a sale of a 10,000 square foot unit in Miami, Florida, with gross

65

proceeds of $1.1 million. Additionally, during the third quarter of 2004, the Company concluded that it would likelysell as many as 12 separate units, aggregating 94,000 square feet as well as a 56,000 square foot retail center of its MICC property and classified such properties as held for disposition. In November, 2004, one of the 12 units was sold for net proceeds of $721,000. During the fourth quarter, the Company also sold two flex parks totaling 400,000square feet in Maryland for gross proceeds of $44.2 million.

The following summarizes the condensed results of operations of the properties sold during 2006, 2005 and 2004(in thousands):

For the Years Ended December 31, 2006 2005 2004 Rental income ................................................................ $ — $ 5,829 $ 13,473Cost of operations .......................................................... (98) (1,818) (4,054)Depreciation................................................................... (27) (1,242) (3,851)Debt extinguishment costs ............................................. — —— (231— )Income (loss) from discontinued operations.................. $ (125) $ 2,769 $ 5,337

In addition to minimum rental payments, certain tenants reimburse the Company for their pro rata share of specified operating expenses, which amounted to $755,000 and $1.6 million, for the years ended December 31, 2005 and 2004, respectively for assets sold during these periods. These amounts are included as rental income and cost of operations in the table presented above for those assets sold.

4. Leasing activity

The Company leases space in its real estate facilities to tenants primarily under non-cancelable leases generally ranging from one to ten years. Future minimum rental revenues excluding recovery of operating expenses as of December 31, 2006 under these leases are as follows (in thousands):

2007 ................................................................................................................................................ $ 199,4722008 ................................................................................................................................................ 156,929 2009 ................................................................................................................................................ 111,288 2010 ................................................................................................................................................ 79,2022011 ................................................................................................................................................ 54,067Thereafter........................................................................................................................................ 74,170

$ 675,128

In addition to minimum rental payments, certain tenants reimburse the Company for their pro rata share of specified operating expenses, which amounted to $32.9 million, $25.5 million and $25.2 million, for the years ended December 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004, respectively. These amounts are included as rental income and cost of operations in the accompanying consolidated statements of income.

Leases for approximately 5% of the leased square footage are subject to termination options which include leases for approximately 1% of the leased square footage having termination options exercisable through December 31,2007 (unaudited). In general, these leases provide for termination payments should the termination options be exercised. The above table is prepared assuming such options are not exercised.

5. Bank Loans

In August of 2005, the Company modified the term of its line of credit (the “Credit Facility”) with Wells FargoBank. The Credit Facility has a borrowing limit of $100.0 million and matures on August 1, 2008. Interest on outstanding borrowings is payable monthly. At the option of the Company, the rate of interest charged is equal to (i) the prime rate or (ii) a rate ranging from the London Interbank Offered Rate (“LIBOR”) plus 0.50% to LIBOR plus 1.20% depending on the Company’s credit ratings and coverage ratios, as defined (currently LIBOR plus 0.65%). Inaddition, the Company is required to pay an annual commitment fee ranging from 0.15% to 0.30% of the borrowinglimit (currently 0.20%). In connection with the modification of the Credit Facility, the Company paid a fee of $450,000, which will be amortized over the life of the Credit Facility. The Company had no balance outstanding on its Credit Facility at December 31, 2006 and 2005. m

66

The Credit Facility requires the Company to meet certain covenants including (i) maintain a balance sheet leverage ratio (as defined) of less than 0.45 to 1.00, (ii) maintain interest and fixed charge coverage ratios (asdefined) of not less than 2.25 to 1.00 and 1.75 to 1.00, respectively, (iii) maintain a minimum tangible net worth (asdefined) and (iv) limit distributions to 95% of funds from operations (as defined) for any four consecutive quarters. In addition, the Company is limited in its ability to incur additional borrowings (the Company is required to maintain unencumbered assets with an aggregate book value equal to or greater than two times the Company’sunsecured recourse debt; the Company did not have any unsecured recourse debt at December 31, 2006) or sellassets. The Company was in compliance with the covenants of the Credit Facility at December 31, 2006.

In February, 2002, the Company entered into a seven year $50.0 million unsecured term note agreement withFleet National Bank. The note bore interest at LIBOR plus 1.45% per annum and was due on February 20, 2009. The Company paid a one-time facility fee of 0.35% or $175,000 for the loan. The Company used the proceeds fromthe loan to reduce the amount drawn on the Credit Facility. In July, 2002, the Company entered into an interest rateswap transaction which had the effect of fixing the rate on the term loan through July, 2004 at 4.46% per annum. InFebruary, 2004, the Company repaid, in full, the $50.0 million outstanding on the term loan.

6. Mortgage notes payable

Mortgage notes consist of the following (in thousands):

December 31, 2006

December 31, 2005

8.19% mortgage note, secured by one commercial property withan approximate carrying amount of $10.7 million, principal and interest payable monthly, due March, 2007 ........................................ $ 5,002 $ 5,302

7.29% mortgage note, secured by one commercial property with an approximate carrying amount of $6.2 million, principal and interest payable monthly, due February, 2009 ...................................rr . 5,490 5,645

5.73% mortgage note, secured by one commercial property with an approximate carrying amount of $32.6 million, principal and interest payable monthly, due March, 2013 ........................................ 14,743 14,946

6.15% mortgage note, secured by one commercial property with anapproximate carrying amount of $31.2 million, principal and interest payable monthly, due November, 2031 (1) ............................ 17,759 —

5.52% mortgage note, secured by one commercial property with anapproximate carrying amount of $17.0 million, principal and interest payable monthly, due May, 2013 (2)...................................... 10,483 —

5.68% mortgage note, secured by one commercial property with anapproximate carrying amount of $19.4 million, principal and interest payable monthly, due May, 2013 (2)...................................... 10,486 —

5.61% mortgage note, secured by one commercial property with anapproximate carrying amount of $6.3 million, principal andinterest payable monthly, due January, 2011 (3)................................. 3,085 —

$ 67,048 $ 25,893

____________ (1) Mortgage note of $16.7 million has a stated interest rate of 7.20%. Based on the fair market value at the

time of assumption, a mortgage premium of $1.0 million was computed based on an effective interest rateof 6.15%. This mortgage is repayable without penalty beginning November, 2011.

(2) Mortgage notes are interest only through June 1, 2006.(3) Mortgage note of $2.8 million has a stated interest rate of 7.61%. Based on the fair market value at the

time of assumption, a mortgage premium of $256,000 was computed based on an effective interest rate of 5.61%.

67

At December 31, 2006, mortgage notes payable have a weighted average interest rate of 6.11% and an averagematurity of 5.1 years with principal payments as follows (in thousands):

2007 .................................................................................................................................................... $ 6,322 2008 .................................................................................................................................................... 1,3962009 .................................................................................................................................................... 6,4422010 .................................................................................................................................................... 1,3762011 .................................................................................................................................................... 19,428Thereafter............................................................................................................................................ 32,084

$ 67,048

7. Minority interests

Common partnership units

The Company presents the accounts of PSB and the Operating Partnership on a consolidated basis. Ownershipinterests in the Operating Partnership that can be redeemed for common stock, other than PSB’s interest, areclassified as minority interest — common units in the consolidated financial statements. Minority interest in income common units consists of the minority interests’ share of the consolidated operatingf results after allocation to preferred units and shares.

Beginning one year from the date of admission as a limited partner (common units) and subject to certain limitations described below, each limited partner other than PSB has the right to require the redemption of its partnership interest.

A limited partner (common units) that exercises its redemption right will receive cash from the OperatingPartnership in an amount equal to the market value (as defined in the Operating Partnership Agreement) of thepartnership interests redeemed. In lieu of the Operating Partnership redeeming the partner for cash, PSB, as generalaapartner, has the right to elect to acquire the partnership interest directly from a limited partner exercising itsredemption right, in exchange for cash in the amount specified above or by issuance of one share of PSB common stock for each unit of limited partnership interest redeemed.

A limited partner (common units) cannot exercise its redemption right if delivery of shares of PSB commonstock would be prohibited under the applicable articles of incorporation, or if the general partner believes that there is a risk that delivery of shares of common stock would cause the general partner to no longer qualify as a REIT, would cause a violation of the applicable securities laws, or would result in the Operating Partnership no longer being treated as a partnership for federal income tax purposes.

At December 31, 2006, there were 7,305,355 common units owned by PSI, which are accounted for as minorityinterests. On a fully converted basis, assuming all 7,305,355 minority interest common units were converted intoshares of common stock of PSB at December 31, 2006, the minority interest units would convert into approximately 25.5% of the common shares outstanding. At the end of each reporting period, the Company determines the amount of equity (book value of net assets) which is allocable to the minority interest based upon the ownership interest and an adjustment is made to the minority interest, with a corresponding adjustment to paid-in capital, to reflect theminority interests’ equity in the Company.

68

Preferred partnership units

Through the Operating Partnership, the Company has the following preferred units outstanding as of December 31, 2006 and 2005 (in thousands):

December 31, Date Redeemed or 2006 2005 Earliest Potential Dividend Units Units Series Issuance Date Redemption Date Rate Outstanding Amount Outstanding Amount Series G...................... October, 2002 October, 2007 7.950% 800 $ 20,000 800 $ 20,000 Series J ....................... May & June, 2004 May, 2009 7.500% 1,710 42,750 1,710 42,750Series N...................... December, 2005 December, 2010 7.125% 800 20,000 800 20,000Series E ...................... September, 2001 September, 2006 9.250% — —— 2,120— 53,000

3,310 $ 82,750 5,430 $ 135,750

On September 21, 2006 the Company redeemed 2.1 million units of its 9.250% Series E Cumulative RedeemablePreferred Units for $53.0 million. In accordance with EITF D-42, the redemptions resulted in a reduction of net income allocable to common shareholders of $1.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2006, and a corresponding increase in the allocation of income to minority interests equal to the excess of the redemptionamount over the carrying amount of the redeemed securities.

On July 12, 2005 the Company redeemed 480,000 units of its 8.875% Series Y Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Operating Partnership Units for $12.0 million. In accordance with EITF D-42, the redemptions resulted ina reduction of net income allocable to common shareholders of $301,000 for the year ended December 31, 2005, and a corresponding increase in the allocation of income to minority interests equal to the excess of the redemptionamount over the carrying amount of the redeemed securities.

During the fourth quarter of 2005, the Company completed a private placement of $20.0 million of preferredunits through its operating partnership. The 7.125% Series N Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Units are non-callable for five years and have no mandatory redemption. The net proceeds from the placements were $19.5 million and will be used to fund future property acquisitions, preferred equity redemptions and for general corporate purposes.

The Operating Partnership has the right to redeem preferred units on or after the fifth anniversary of theapplicable issuance date at the original capital contribution plus the cumulative priority return, as defined, to the redemption date to the extent not previously distributed. The preferred units are exchangeable for CumulativeRedeemable Preferred Stock of the respective series of PSB on or after the tenth anniversary of the date of issuance at the option of the Operating Partnership or a majority of the holders of the respective preferred units. The yCumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock will have the same distribution rate and par value as the corresponding preferred units and will otherwise have equivalent terms to the other series of preferred stock described in Note 9. As of December 31, 2006 and 2005, the Company had $2.3 million and $3.7 million, respectively, of deferred costs in connection with the issuance of preferred units, which the Company will report as additional distributions upon notice of redemption.

8. Property management contracts

The Operating Partnership manages industrial, office and retail facilities for PSI and affiliated entities. Thesefacilities, all located in the United States, operate under the “PS Business Parks” or “Public Storage” names. In addition, the Operating Partnership previously managed properties for third party owners.

The property management contracts provide for compensation of a percentage of the gross revenues of thefacilities managed. Under the supervision of the property owners, the Operating Partnership coordinates rental policies, rent collections, marketing activities, the purchase of equipment and supplies, maintenance activities, and the selection and engagement of vendors, suppliers and independent contractors. In addition, the Operating Partnership assists and advises the property owners in establishing policies for the hire, discharge and supervision of employees for the operation of these facilities, including property managers and leasing, billing and maintenance personnel.

69

The property management contract with PSI is for a seven year term with the term being automatically extended one year on each anniversary. At any time, either party may notify the other that the contract is not to be extended, in which case the contract will expire on the first anniversary of its then scheduled expiration date. For PSI affiliate owned properties, PSI can cancel the property management contract upon 60 days notice while the Operating Partnership can cancel upon seven years notice. Management fee revenues under these contracts totaled $625,000, $579,000 and $562,000 for the years ended December 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004, respectively.

9. Shareholders’ equity

Preferred stock

As of December 31, 2006 and December 31, 2005, the Company had the following series of preferred stock outstanding, including those called for redemption (in thousands):

December 31, 2006 December 31, 2005

Series Issuance Date Earliest Potential Redemption Date

DividendRate

Shares Outstanding Amount

SharesOutstanding Amount

Series F ................ January, 2002 January, 2007 8.750% 2,000 $ 50,000 2,000 $ 50,000Series H ............... January & October, 2004 January, 2009 7.000% 8,200 205,000 8,200 205,000 Series I ................. April, 2004 April, 2009 6.875% 3,000 75,000 3,000 75,000 Series K ............... June, 2004 June, 2009 7.950% 2,300 57,500 2,300 57,500Series L................ August, 2004 August, 2009 7.600% 2,300 57,500 2,300 57,500 Series M............... May, 2005 May, 2010 7.200% 3,300 82,500 3,300 82,500Series O ............... June & August, 2006 June, 2011 7.375% 3,800 95,000 — — Series D ............... May, 2001 May, 2006 9.500% — —— 2,634— 65,850

24,900 $ 622,500 23,734 $ 593,350

On June 16, 2006, the Company issued 3.0 million depositary shares, each representing 1/1,000 of a share of the7.375% Cumulative Preferred Stock, Series O, at $25.00 per depositary share. On August 16, 2006 the Company issued an additional 800,000 depositary shares each representing 1/1000 of a share of the 7.375% Cumulative Preferred Stock, Series O, at $25.00 per depository share.

On May 10, 2006, the Company redeemed 2.6 million depositary shares of its 9.500% Cumulative Preferred Stock, Series D for $65.9 million. In accordance with EITF Topic D-42, the redemption resulted in a reduction of net income allocable to common shareholders of $1.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2006 equal to the excess of the redemption amount over the carrying amount of the redeemed securities.

In May of 2005, the Company issued 3.3 million depositary shares each representing 1/1,000 of a share of the7.200% Cumulative Preferred Stock, Series M, at $25.00 per depositary share.

Subsequent to December 31, 2006, the Company issued 5.8 million depositary shares, each representing 1/1,000of a share of the 6.700% Cumulative Preferred Stock, Series P, at $25.00 per depositary share.

Subsequent to December 31, 2006, the Company redeemed 2.0 million depositary shares of its 8.750% Cumulative Preferred Stock, Series F for $50.0 million. The Company reported the excess of the redemption amount over the carrying amount, $1.7 million, as an additional allocation of net income to preferred shareholders and a corresponding reduction of net income allocable to common shareholders and common unit holders for the year ended December 31, 2006.

The Company paid $44.6 million, $43.0 million and $31.2 million in distributions to its preferred shareholders for the years ended December 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004, respectively.

Holders of the Company’s preferred stock will not be entitled to vote on most matters, except under certain conditions. In the event of a cumulative arrearage equal to six quarterly dividends, the holders of the preferred stock will have the right to elect two additional members to serve on the Company’s Board of Directors until all events of default have been cured. At December 31, 2006, there were no dividends in arrears.

70

Except under certain conditions relating to the Company’s qualification as a REIT, the preferred stock is not redeemable prior to the previously noted redemption dates. On or after the respective redemption dates, the respective series of preferred stock will be redeemable, at the option of the Company, in whole or in part, at $25 per depositary share, plus any accrued and unpaid dividends. As of December 31, 2006 and 2005, the Company had $19.5 million and $20.1 million, respectively, of deferred costs in connection with the issuance of preferred stock, which the Company will report as additional non-cash distributions upon notice of its intent to redeem such shares.

Common stock

The Company’s Board of Directors has authorized the repurchase, from time to time, of up to 4.5 million shares of the Company’s common stock on the open market or in privately negotiated transactions. In 2006, the Companyrepurchased 309,100 shares of common stock at a cost of $16.1 million. During the year ended December 31, 2005, the Company repurchased 361,400 shares of common stock at a cost of $16.6 million. No shares were repurchased in 2004. Since inception through December 31, 2006, the Company has repurchm ased an aggregate of 3.3 millionshares of common stock at an aggregate cost of $102.6 million (average cost of $31.18 per share).

The Company paid $24.7 million ($1.16 per common share), $25.3 million ($1.16 per common share) and $25.3million ($1.16 per common share) in distributions to its common shareholders for the years ended December 31,2006, 2005 and 2004, respectively. The portion of the distributions classified as ordinary income was 100.0%,95.5% and 91.3% for the years ended December 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004, respectively. The portion of the distributions classified as long-term capital gain income was 4.5% and 8.7% for the years ended December 31, 2005 and 2004, respectively. No portion of the distributions were classified as long term capital gain income for the year ended December 31, 2006. Percentages in the three preceding sentences are unaudited. Pursuant to restrictionsimposed by the Credit Facility, distributions may not exceed 95% of funds from operations, as defined.

Equity Stock

In addition to common and preferred stock, the Company is authorized to issue 100.0 million shares of Equity Stock. The Articles of Incorporation provide that the Equity Stock may be issued from time to time in one or more series and give the Board of Directors broad authority to fix the dividend and distribution rights, conversion and voting rights, redemption provisions and liquidation rights of each series of Equity Stock.

10. Stock-based compensation

PSB has a 1997 Stock Option and Incentive Plan (the “1997 Plan”) and a 2003 Stock Option and Incentive Plan(the “2003 Plan”), each covering 1.5 million shares of PSB’s common stock. Under the 1997 Plan and 2003 Plan, PSB has granted non-qualified options to certain directors, officers and key employees to purchase shares of PSB’scommon stock at a price no less than the fair market value of the common stock at the date of grant. Additionally, under the 1997 Plan and 2003 Plan, PSB has granted restricted stock units to officers and key employees.

Generally, options under the 1997 Plan vest over a three-year period from the date of grant at the rate of one third per year and expire ten years after the date of grant. Options under the 2003 Plan vest over a five-year period from the date of grant at the rate of one fifth per year and expire ten years after the date of grant. Restricted stock units granted prior to August, 2002 are subject to a five-year vesting schedule, at 30% in year three, 30% in year four and 40% in year five. Generally, restricted stock units granted subsequent to August, 2002 are subject to a six year vesting schedule, none in year one and 20% for each of the next five years. Certain restricted stock unit grants are subject to a four year vesting schedule, with either cliff vesting after year four or none in year one and 33.3% for each of the next three years.

On December 16, 2004, the FASB issued SFAS No. 123 (revised 2004), “Share-Based Payment,” which is arevision of FASB Statement No. 123, “Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation.” SFAS No. 123(R) supersedes APB Opinion No. 25, “Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees,” and amends SFAS No. 95, “Statement of Cash Flows.” Generally, the approach in SFAS No. 123(R) is similar to the approach described in SFAS No. 123. However, SFAS No. 123(R) requires all share-based payments to employees, including grants of employee stockoptions, to be recognized in the income statement based on their fair values. Effective January 1, 2006, the Company adopted SFAS No. 123(R) using the modified prospective method.

71

The weighted average grant date fair value of the options granted in the years ended December 31, 2006, 2005and 2004 were $11.24 per share, $6.98 per share and $6.80 per share, respectively. The Company has calculated thefair value of each option grant on the date of grant using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model with the followingweighted average assumptions used for grants for the years ended December 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004, respectively;a dividend yield of 2.1%, 2.6% and 2.6%; expected volatility of 17.9%, 17.6% and 17.5%; expected life of fiveyears; and risk-free interest rates of 4.9%, 4.2% and 3.6%.

The weighted average grant date fair value of restricted stock units granted during the years ended December 31,2006, 2005 and 2004, were $55.12, $41.43 and $41.67, respectively. The Company has calculated the fair value of each restricted stock unit grant using the market value on the date of grant.

At December 31, 2006, there were a combined total of 1.3 million options and restricted stock units authorized togrant. Information with respect to outstanding options and nonvested restricted stock units granted under the 1997 Plan and 2003 Plan is as follows:

Options: Number of

Options

Weighted Average Exercise Price

Weighted Average Remaining Contract Life

Aggregate Intrinsic

Value (in thousands)

Outstanding at December 31, 2003............................. 851,613 $ 29.27 Granted..................................................................... 90,000 $ 44.46 Exercised.................................................................. (269,710) $ 27.33 Forfeited................................................................... (77,668) $ 31.69

Outstanding at December 31, 2004............................. 594,235 $ 34.23 Granted..................................................................... 85,000 $ 42.41 Exercised.................................................................. (70,364) $ 27.96 Forfeited................................................................... (9,000) $ 31.66

Outstanding at December 31, 2005............................. 599,871 $ 36.25Granted..................................................................... 32,000 $ 56.73 Exercised.................................................................. (37,900) $ 36.07 Forfeited................................................................... (5,000) $ 44.20

Outstanding at December 31, 2006............................. 588,971 $ 37.90 6.13 Years $ 19,248 Exercisable at December 31, 2006.............................. 366,771 $ 31.89 5.18 Years $ 14,239

Restricted Stock Units: Number of

Units

Weighted Average Grant Date Fair Value

Nonvested at December 31, 2003 .............................. 94,450 $ 31.08Granted.................................................................... 64,250 $ 41.67Vested ..................................................................... (12,050) $ 27.94Forfeited.................................................................. (26,550) $ 31.21

Nonvested at December 31, 2004 .............................. 120,100 $ 37.02Granted.................................................................... 38,200 $ 41.43Vested ..................................................................... (19,250) $ 30.61Forfeited.................................................................. (11,050) $ 37.98

Nonvested at December 31, 2005 .............................. 128,000 $ 39.27Granted.................................................................... 133,950 $ 55.12 Vested ..................................................................... (24,000) $ 36.06Forfeited.................................................................. (10,750) $ 40.91

Nonvested at September 30, 2006.............................. 227,200 $ 48.88

72

Had compensation cost for the 1997 Plan for options granted prior to December 31, 2001 been determined based on the fair value at the grant date for awards under the 1997 Plan consistent with the method prescribed by SFAS No. 123(R) the Company’s pro forma net income available to common shareholders would have been:

For the Years Ended December 31, 2006 2005 2004

(In thousands, except per share data)Net income allocable to common shareholders,

as reported............................................................. $ 16,647 $ 32,283 $ 29,123Deduct: Total stock-based employee

compensation expense determined under fair value based method of all awards ......................... — —— (215— )

Net income allocable to common shareholders,as adjusted............................................................. $ 16,647 $ 32,283 $ 28,908

Earnings per share: Basic as reported ................................................... $ 0.78 $ 1.48 $ 1.34Basic as adjusted ................................................... $ 0.78 $ 1.48 $ 1.33Diluted as reported ................................................ $ 0.77 $ 1.47 $ 1.33Diluted as adjusted ................................................ $ 0.77 $ 1.47 $ 1.32

Included in the Company’s consolidated statements of income for the years ended December 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004 is $527,000, $406,000 and $241,000, respectively, in net stock option compensation expense related to stock options granted. Net compensation expense of $2.3 million, $626,000 and $673,000 related to restricted stock unitswas recognized during the years ended December 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004, respectively.

As of December 31, 2006, there was $1.3 million of unamortized compensation expense related to stock optionsexpected to be recognized over a weighted average period of 3.2 years. As of December 31, 2006, there was $7.9million of unamortized compensation expense related to restricted stock units expected to be recognized over a weighted average period of 3.1 years.

Cash received from stock option exercises was $1.4 million, $1.9 million and $7.0 million for the years ended December 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004, respectively. The aggregate intrinsic value of the stock options exercised during the years ended December 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004 was $907,000, $1.0 million, and $4.2 million, respectively.

During the year ended December 31, 2006, 24,000 restricted stock units vested; of this amount, 16,612 shareswere issued, net of shares applied to payroll taxes. The aggregate fair value of the shares vested for the year ended fDecember 31, 2006 was $1.4 million. During the year ended December 31, 2005, 19,250 restricted stock unitsvested; of this amount, 11,962 shares were issued, net of shares applied to payroll taxes. The aggregate fair value of the shares vested for the year ended December 31, 2005 was $841,000. During the year ended December 31, 2004, 12,050 shares of restricted stock units vested; of this amount, the Company redeemed 7,621 shares for $321,000 andissued 4,429 shares, net of shares applied to payroll taxes. The aggregate fair value of the shares vested for the year ended December 31, 2004 was $497,000.

In May of 2004, the shareholders of the Company approved the issuance of up to 70,000 shares of common stock under the Retirement Plan for Non-Employee Directors (the “Director Plan”). Under the Director Plan the Companygrants 1,000 shares of common stock for each year served as a director up to a maximum of 5,000 shares issued upon retirement. The Company recognizes compensation expense with regards to grants to be issued in the futureunder the Director Plan. As a result, included in the Company’s income statement for the year ended December 31, 2006 and 2005, was $66,000 and $28,000, respectively, in compensation expense. As of December 31, 2006 and f2005, there was $413,000 and $179,000, respectively, of unamortized compensation expense related to these shares.In May of 2006, the Company issued 5,000 shares to a director upon retirement with an aggregate fair value of $256,000.

73

11. Recent accounting pronouncements

In June 2006, the FASB issued interpretation No. 48, “Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes, aninterpretation of SFAS No. 109, Accounting for Income Taxes” (FIN 48), to create a single model to address accounting for uncertainty in tax provisions. FIN 48 clarifies the accounting for income taxes, by prescribing a minimum recognition threshold a tax position is required to meet before being recognized in the financial statements. FIN 48 also provides guidance on derecognition, measurement, classification, interest and penalties, accounting in interim periods, disclosure and transition. FIN 48 is effecuu tive for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2006. The Company will adopt FIN 48 as of January 1, 2007, as requf ired. The Company does not expect that the adoption of FIN 48 will have a significant impact on the Company’s financial position and results of toperations.

12. Supplementary quarterly financial data (unaudited) Three Months Ended

March 31, 2005

June 30,2005

September 30, 2005

December 31, 2005

(In thousands, except per share data)Revenues (1) ............................................. $ 53,908 $ 55,533 $ 54,799 $ 55,943Cost of operations (1)................................ $ 15,870 $ 16,623 $ 16,182 $ 17,037Net income allocable to common

shareholders ............................................ $ 7,324 $ 5,772 $ 14,264 $ 4,923Net income per share: Basic.......................................................... $ 0.34 $ 0.26 $ 0.65 $ 0.23Diluted ...................................................... $ 0.33 $ 0.26 $ 0.65 $ 0.22 Three Months Ended

March 31,2006

June 30, 2006

September 30, 2006

December 31,2006

(In thousands, except per share data)Revenues (1) ............................................. $ 58,903 $ 59,305 $ 61,842 $ 62,789Cost of operations (1)................................ $ 17,946 $ 18,195 $ 19,213 $ 19,317Net income allocable to common

shareholders ............................................ $ 5,062 $ 4,395 $ 3,478 $ 3,712Net income per share: Basic.......................................................... $ 0.24 $ 0.21 $ 0.16 $ 0.17Diluted....................................................... $ 0.23 $ 0.20 $ 0.16 $ 0.17

____________(1) Discontinued operations are excluded.

13. Commitments and contingencies

Substantially all of the Company’s properties have been subjected to Phase I environmental reviews. Suchreviews have not revealed, nor is management aware of, any probable or reasonably possible environmental costs that management believes would have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, assets or results of operations, nor is the Company aware of any potentially material environmental liability.

The Company currently is neither subject to any other material litigation nor, to management’s knowledge, isany material litigation currently threatened against the Company other than routine litigation and administrative proceedings arising in the ordinary course of business.

14. 401(K) Plan

The Company has a 401(K) savings plan (the “Plan”) which all eligible employees may participate. The Planprovides for the Company to make matching contributions to all eligible employees up to 4% of their annual salary dependent on the employee’s level of participation. For the years endef d December 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004, $231,000, $203,000 and $219,000, respectively, was charged as expense related to this plan.

74

PS B

USI

NES

S PA

RK

S, IN

C.

SCH

EDU

LE

III -

REA

L E

STA

TE

AN

D A

CC

UM

ULA

TED

DE

PRE

CIA

TIO

N

DE

CEM

BE

R 3

1, 2

006

(DO

LL

AR

S IN

TH

OU

SAN

DS)

In

itial

Cos

t to

Com

pany

Cos

t C

apita

lized

Subs

e que

nt

to

Acq

uisi

tion

G

ross

Am

ount

at W

hich

Car

ried

at

Dec

embe

r 31

, 200

6

Des

crip

tion

L

ocat

ion

Enc

umbr

ance

s

Lan

d

B

uild

ings

and

Impr

ovem

ents

Bui

ldin

gs

and

Impr

ovem

ents

Lan

d

Bui

ldin

gs

and

Impr

ovem

ents

T

otal

s A

ccum

ulat

ed

De p

reci

atio

n D

ate

Acq

u ire

d

Dep

reci

able

L

ives

(Y

ears

)Pr

oduc

e....

......

......

......

......

. Sa

n Fr

anci

sco,

CA

—$

776

$

1,88

6 $

19

2 $

776

$ 2,

078

$ 2,

854

$

630

03/1

7/98

5-

30

Cre

nsha

w II

......

......

......

....

Torr

ance

, CA

—

2,31

8

6,06

9

1,56

7

2,31

8

7,63

6

9,95

42,

884

04/1

2/97

5-

30A

irpor

t....

......

......

......

......

..

San

Fran

cisc

o, C

A

—

899

2,

387

419

89

9

2,80

6

3,70

5

917

04/1

2/97

5-

30

Chr

isto

pher

Ave

......

......

...

Gai

ther

sbur

g,M

D

—

47

5

1,20

3

353

47

5 1,

556

2,

031

58

1 04

/12/

97

5-30

M

onte

rey

Park

......

......

......

Mon

tere

y Pa

rk, C

A

—

3,

078

7,86

2

946

3,

078

8,

808

11

,886

3,

180

01/0

1/97

5-

30

Cal

le D

el O

aks.

......

......

....

Mon

tere

y, C

A

—

28

8

706

21

1

288

91

7

1,20

5

362

01/0

1/97

5-

30M

ilwau

kie

I....

......

......

......

M

ilwau

kie,

OR

—

1,

125

2,

857

99

1

1,12

5

3,84

8

4,97

31,

435

01/0

1/97

5-

30Ed

war

ds R

oad

......

......

......

C

errit

os, C

A

—

450

1,

217

62

6

450

1,

843

2,29

3

656

01/0

1/97

5-

30

Rai

nier

......

......

......

......

......

R

ento

n, W

A

—

33

0

889

31

1

330

1,

200

1,

530

44

1 01

/01/

97

5-30

Lu

sk...

......

......

......

......

......

. Sa

n D

iego

, CA

—

1,50

0

3,73

8

1,42

0

1,50

0

5,15

86,

658

1,

944

01/0

1/97

5-

30

Eise

nhow

er...

......

......

......

..

Ale

xand

ria, V

A

—

1,44

0

3,63

5

1,72

2 1,

440

5,35

7

6,79

7

2,01

8 01

/01/

97

5-30

McK

ellip

s....

......

......

......

...

Tem

pe, A

Z

—

195

52

2

392

19

5

914

1,

109

437

01/0

1/97

5-

30O

ld O

akla

nd R

d....

......

......

Sa

n Jo

se, C

A

—

3,

458

8,

765

1,

897

3,

458

10

,662

14

,120

3,94

0 01

/01/

97

5-30

Ju

nipe

ro...

......

......

......

......

. Si

gnal

Hill

, CA

—

900

2,

510

35

1

900

2,

861

3,

761

99

201

/01/

97

5-30

N

orth

gate

Blv

d....

......

......

. Sa

cram

ento

, CA

—

1,71

0

4,56

7

2,29

7 1,

710

6,

864

8,

574

2,

737

01/0

1/97

5-

30U

plan

der.

......

......

......

......

..C

ulve

r City

, CA

—

3,25

2

8,15

7

3,49

1

3,25

2

11,6

48

14,9

00

4,88

2 01

/01/

97

5-30

Uni

vers

ity...

......

......

......

....

Tem

pe, A

Z

—

2,16

0

5,45

4 3,

387

2,

160

8,

841

11

,001

4,

041

01/0

1/97

5-

30

E. 2

8th

Stre

et...

......

......

.....

Sign

al H

ill, C

A

—

1,

500

3,

749

93

8

1,50

0

4,68

7

6,18

7

1,79

2 01

/01/

97

5-30

W

. Mai

n....

......

......

......

......

M

esa,

AZ

—

675

1,

692

1,

195

67

5

2,88

7

3,56

2

1,30

4 01

/01/

97

5-30

S. E

dwar

d...

......

......

......

....

Tem

pe, A

Z

—

645

1,

653

1,

506

64

5

3,15

9

3,80

4

1,35

0 01

/01/

97

5-30

Leap

woo

d A

ve...

......

......

..

Car

son,

CA

—

990

2,

496

99

3 99

0

3,48

9

4,47

9

1,38

5 01

/01/

97

5-30

Gre

at O

aks.

......

......

......

.....

W

oodb

ridge

, VA

—

1,35

0

3,39

8

1,07

6

1,35

0

4,47

4

5,82

4

1,78

0 01

/01/

97

5-30

V

entu

ra B

lvd.

II...

......

......

. St

udio

City

, CA

—

621

tt

1,53

0

253

62

1

1,78

3

2,40

4

661

01/0

1/97

5-

30G

unst

on...

......

......

......

......

. Lo

rton,

VA

—

4,14

6

17,8

72

2,

321

4,

146

20

,193

24

,339

7,91

3 06

/17/

98

5-30

C

anad

a....

......

......

......

......

..

Lake

For

est,

CA

—

5,50

8

13,7

85

3,53

8

5,50

8

17,3

23

22,8

31

6,03

3 12

/23/

97

5-30

R

idge

Rou

te...

......

......

......

. La

guna

Hill

s,C

A

—

16

,261

39

,559

2,

368

16

,261

41,9

27

58,1

88

13,5

19

12/2

3/97

5-

30

Lake

For

est C

omm

erce

Pa

rk...

......

......

......

......

..

Lagu

na H

ills,

CA

—

2,03

7

5,05

13,

365

2,

037

8,

416

10

,453

3,

686

12/2

3/97

5-

30B

uena

Par

k In

dust

rial

C

ente

r.....

......

......

......

...B

uena

Par

k, C

A

—

3,

245

7,

703

1,

457

3,

245

9,

160

12

,405

3,

331

12/2

3/97

5-

30

Cer

r itos

Bus

ines

s Cen

ter.

. C

errit

os, C

A

—

4,21

8

10,2

73

2,

567

4,

218

12

,840

17

,058

4,

422

12/2

3/97

5-

30Pa

rkw

ay C

omm

erce

Cen

ter..

......

......

......

......

H

ayw

ard,

CA

—

4,

398

10

,433

2,89

5

4,39

8

13,3

28

17,7

26

4,32

0 12

/23/

97

5-30

N

orth

poin

te E

......

......

......

. St

erlin

g, V

A

—

1,

156

2,

957

75

4

1,15

6

3,71

1

4,86

7

1,39

3 12

/10/

97

5-30

Am

men

dale

......

......

......

....

Bel

tsvi

lle, M

D

—

4,

278

18

,380

5,

866

4,27

8

24,2

46

28,5

24

11,3

23

01/1

3/98

5-

30Sh

aw R

oad.

......

......

......

.....

St

erlin

g, V

A

—

2,

969

10

,008

3,08

5

2,96

9

13,0

9316

,062

6,

063

03/0

9/98

5-

30

Cre

eksi

de-P

hase

1...

......

...

Bea

verto

n, O

R

—

1,

852

7,

779

(1

,427

)

1,85

2

6,35

2

8,20

4

2,58

7 05

/04/

98

5-30

C

reek

side

-Pha

se 2

B

ldg-

4....

......

......

......

.....

B

eave

rton,

OR

—

807

2,

542

1,

553

807

4,

095

4,

902

1,

667

05/0

4/98

5-

30

75

In

itial

Cos

t to

Com

pany

Cos

t C

apita

lized

Subs

eque

nt

to

Acq

uisi

tion

G

ross

Am

ount

at W

hich

Car

ried

at

Dec

embe

r 31

, 200

6

Des

crip

tion

L

ocat

ion

Enc

umbr

ance

s

Lan

d

B

uild

ings

and

Impr

ovem

ents

Bui

ldin

gs

and

Impr

ovem

ents

Lan

d

Bui

ldin

gs

and

Impr

ovem

ents

T

otal

s A

ccum

ulat

ed

Dep

rec i

atio

n D

ate

Acq

uire

d

Dep

reci

able

L

ives

(Y

ears

)C

reek

side

-Pha

se 2

B

ldg-

5....

......

......

......

.....

B

eave

rton,

OR

—

52

1

1,60

3

774

521

2,

377

2,

898

99

905

/04/

98

5-30

C

reek

side

-Pha

se 2

B

ldg-

1....

......

......

......

.....

B

eave

rton,

OR

—

1,32

6

4,03

5

1,23

0

1,32

6

5,26

56,

591

2,

291

05/0

4/98

5-

30C

reek

side

-Pha

se 3

......

......

B

eave

rton,

OR

—

1,35

3

4,10

1

1,11

8

1,35

3

5,21

9

6,57

2

2,37

0 05

/04/

98

5-30

C

reek

side

-Pha

se 5

......

......

B

eave

rton,

OR

—

1,74

1

5,30

1

1,44

6

1,74

1

6,74

7

8,48

8

2,94

4 05

/04/

98

5-30

C

reek

side

-Pha

se 6

......

......

B

eave

rton,

OR

—

2,61

6

7,90

8

2,37

9

2,61

6

10,2

87

12,9

03

4,50

0 05

/04/

98

5-30

Cre

eksi

de-P

hase

7...

......

...

Bea

verto

n, O

R

—

3,

293

9,

938

4,

006

3,

293

13

,944

17

,237

6,

045

05/0

4/98

5-

30C

reek

side

-Pha

se 8

......

......

B

eave

rton,

OR

—

1,14

0

3,64

4 54

91,

140

4,

193

5,

333

1,76

8 05

/04/

98

5-30

N

orth

poin

te G

......

......

......

. St

erlin

g, V

A

—

824

2,

964

1,

288

824

4,

252

5,

076

2,

093

06/1

1/98

5-

30

Las P

lum

as...

......

......

......

..

San

Jose

, CA

—

4,37

9

12,8

89

3,69

64,

379

16

,585

20

,964

7,57

7 12

/31/

98

5-30

Lafa

yette

......

......

......

......

...

Cha

ntill

y, V

A

—

67

1

4,17

9 38

467

1

4,56

3

5,23

41,

729

01/2

9/99

5-

30C

reek

side

VII

......

......

......

..

Bea

verto

n, O

R

—

35

8

3,23

2

138

358

3,

370

3,

728

82

4 04

/17/

00

5-30

D

ulle

s Sou

th...

......

......

......

C

hant

illy,

VA

—

59

9

3,09

8 60

4

599

3,

702

4,

301

1,

407

06/3

0/99

5-

30

Sully

field

Circ

le...

......

......

C

hant

illy,

VA

—

774

3,

712

865

77

4

4,57

7

5,35

1

1,78

7 06

/30/

99

5-30

Pa

rk E

ast I

& II

......

......

.....

C

hant

illy,

VA

5,00

2

2,32

4

10,8

75

2,16

1

2,32

4

13,0

36

15,3

60

4,67

8 06

/30/

99

5-30

Park

Eas

t III

......

......

......

....

Cha

ntill

y, V

A

5,

490

1,

527

7,

154

496

1,52

7

7,65

0

9,17

72,

943

06/3

0/99

5-

30

Nor

thpo

inte

Bus

ines

s

Cen

ter A

......

......

......

....

Sacr

amen

to, C

A

—

72

9

3,32

4

1,01

9

729

4,

343

5,

072

1,

794

07/2

9/99

5-

30

Cor

pora

te P

ark

Phoe

nix

...

Phoe

nix,

AZ

—

2,

761

10

,269

1,24

9

2,76

1

11,5

18

14,2

79

3,95

7 12

/30/

99

5-30

Sant

a C

lara

Tec

hnol

ogy

Pa

rk...

......

......

......

......

..

Sant

aC

lara

, CA

—

7,67

3

15,6

45

66

77,

673

16

,312

23

,985

5,71

6 03

/28/

00

5-30

C

orpo

rate

Poi

nte.

......

......

..

Irvi

ne, C

A

—

6,87

6

18,5

19

2,

969

6,

876

21,4

88

28,3

64

7,78

4 09

/22/

00

5-30

Lafa

yette

II/P

leas

ant

V

alle

y R

d....

......

......

....

Cha

ntill

y, V

A

—

1,

009

9,

219

2,

269

1,00

9

11,4

88

12,4

97

5,36

4 08

/15/

01

5-30

N

orth

poin

te B

usin

ess

C

ente

r B...

......

......

......

.Sa

cram

ento

, CA

—

717

3,

269

1,

237

71

7

4,50

6

5,22

3

1,93

3 07

/29/

99

5-30

N

orth

poin

te B

usin

ess

C

ente

r C...

......

......

......

. Sa

cram

ento

,CA

—

726

3,

313

995

72

6

4,30

8

5,03

4

1,92

2 07

/29/

99

5-30

Nor

thpo

inte

Bus

ines

s

Cen

ter D

......

......

......

....

Sacr

amen

to, C

A

—

42

7

1,95

0 50

7

427

2,

457

2,

884

88

807

/29/

99

5-30

Nor

thpo

inte

Bus

ines

s

Cen

ter E

......

......

......

....

Sacr

amen

to, C

A

—

43

2

1,97

0 19

2

432

2,

162

2,

594

79

1 07

/29/

99

5-30

I-95

Bui

ldin

g I.

......

......

.....

Sp

ringf

ield

, VA

—

1,30

8

5,79

0

ff26

9

1,30

8

6,05

9

7,36

72,

150

12/2

0/00

5-

30I-

95 B

uild

ing

II...

......

......

..

Sprin

gfie

ld, V

A

—

1,

308

5,

790

ff94

8

1,30

8

6,73

8

8,04

62,

624

12/2

0/00

5-

30I-

95 B

uild

ing

III.

......

......

..

Sprin

gfie

ld, V

A

—

91

9

4,09

2ff

7,31

8

919

11

,410

12

,329

6,76

4 12

/20/

00

5-30

2700

Pro

sper

ity A

venu

e...

Fa

irfax

, VA

—

3,

404

9,

883

20

2

3,40

4

10,0

85

13,4

89

3,24

7 06

/01/

01

5-30

2701

Pro

sper

ity A

venu

e...

Fa

irfax

, VA

—

2,

199

6,

374

1,

079

2,

199

7,45

3

9,65

2

2,57

5 06

/01/

015-

3027

10 P

rosp

erity

Ave

nue.

..

Fairf

ax, V

A

—

969

2,

844

46

1

969

3,30

5

4,27

4

1,10

0 06

/01/

015-

30

2711

Pro

sper

ity A

venu

e...

Fa

irfax

, VA

—

1,04

7

3,09

9

622

1,

047

3,72

1

4,76

8

1,29

4 06

/01/

015-

30

2720

Pro

sper

ity A

venu

e...

Fa

irfax

, VA

—

1,89

8

5,50

2

921

1,

898

6,

423

8,

321

2,

320

06/0

1/01

5-

30

2721

Pro

sper

ity A

venu

e...

Fa

irfax

, VA

—

576

1,

673

76

3

576

2,

436

3,

012

1,

181

06/0

1/01

5-

30

2730

Pro

sper

ity A

venu

e...

Fa

irfax

, VA

—

3,01

1

8,84

1

2,06

5

3,01

1

10,9

06

13,9

17

3,70

1 06

/01/

01

5-30

2731

Pro

sper

ity A

venu

e...

Fa

irfax

, VA

—

524

1,

521

35

5

524

1,

876

2,

400

67

8 06

/01/

01

5-30

2740

Pro

sper

ity A

venu

e...

Fa

irfax

, VA

—

890

2,

732

68

890

2,

800

3,

690

1,

014

06/0

1/01

5-

3027

41 P

rosp

erity

Ave

nue.

..

Fairf

ax, V

A—

78

6

2,28

4

287

786

2,

571

3,

357

90

8 06

/01/

01

5-30

27

50 P

rosp

erity

Ave

nue.

..

Fairf

ax, V

A—

4,

203

12

,190

3,37

9

4,20

3

15,5

69

19,7

72

5,68

7 06

/01/

01

5-30

76

In

itial

Cos

t to

Com

pany

Cos

t C

apita

lized

Subs

eque

nt

to

Acq

uisi

tion

G

ross

Am

ount

at W

hich

Car

ried

at

Dec

embe

r 31

, 200

6

Des

crip

tion

L

ocat

ion

Enc

umbr

ance

s

Lan

d

B

uild

ings

and

Impr

ovem

ents

Bui

ldin

gs

and

Impr

ovem

ents

Lan

d

Bui

ldin

gs

and

Impr

ovem

ents

T

otal

s A

ccum

ulat

ed

Dep

rec i

atio

n D

ate

Acq

uire

d

Dep

reci

able

L

ives

(Y

ears

)27

51 P

rosp

erity

Ave

nue.

..

Fairf

ax, V

A

—

3,64

0

10,6

32

68

0

3,64

0

11,3

12

14,9

52

3,59

2 06

/01/

01

5-30

Gre

enbr

ier C

ourt

......

......

..

Bea

verto

n, O

R

—2,

771

8,

403

1,

305

2,

771

9,70

8

12,4

79

3,41

2 11

/20/

01

5-30

Pa

rksi

de...

......

......

......

......

.B

eave

rton,

OR

—

4,34

813

,502

1,15

7

4,34

8

14,6

59

19,0

07

5,38

7 11

/20/

01

5-30

The

Atri

um...

......

......

......

..

Bea

verto

n, O

R

—

5,53

5

16,8

14

2,

005

5,

535

18

,819

24,3

54

6,25

7 11

/20/

01

5-30

Wat

ersi

de...

......

......

......

.....

B

eave

rton,

OR

—

4,04

512

,419

1,80

4

4,04

5

14,2

23

18,2

68

5,

160

11/2

0/01

5-

30R

idge

view

......

......

......

......

. B

eave

rton,

OR

—

2,

478

7,

531

R

144

2,

478

7,67

5

10,1

53

2,

577

11/2

0/01

5-

30

The

Com

mon

s....

......

......

..

Bea

verto

n, O

R

—

1,

439

4,

566

1,

934

1,

439

6,

500

7,93

9

2,56

8 11

/20/

01

5-30

O

CB

C C

ente

r 1...

......

......

. Sa

nta

Ana

, CA

—

734

2,

752

58

0 73

4

3,33

2

4,06

61,

303

06/1

0/03

5-

30

OC

BC

Cen

ter 2

......

......

....

Sant

a A

na, C

A

—

2,

154

8,

093

1,

472

2,15

4

9,56

5

11,7

19

3,87

0 06

/10/

03

5-30

O

CB

C C

ente

r 3...

......

......

. Sa

nta

Ana

, CA

—

3,01

9

11,3

48

5,

492

3,01

9

16,8

40

19

,859

6,19

7 06

/10/

03

5-30

O

CB

C C

ente

r 4...

......

......

. Sa

nta

Ana

, CA

—

1,65

5

6,24

3

5,86

8 1,

655

12

,111

13,7

665,

527

06/1

0/03

5-

30

OC

BC

Cen

ter 5

......

......

....

Sant

a A

na, C

A

—

1,

843

7,

310

64

4 1,

843

7,

954

9,

797

3,33

5 06

/10/

03

5-30

M

etro

Bus

ines

s Par

k...

.....

Ph

oeni

x, A

Z

—

2,36

9

7,24

5

731

2,

369

7,

976

10,3

45

1,

635

12/1

7/03

5-

30O

rang

ewoo

d C

orp.

Pla

za.

Ora

nge,

CA

—

2,63

712

,291

1,84

8

2,63

7

14,1

39

16,7

76

2,

897

12/2

4/03

5-

30Fa

irfax

Exe

cutiv

e Pa

rk...

..

Fairf

ax, V

A

—

4,64

719

,492

2,41

6

4,64

7

21,9

08

26,5

55

4,

015

05/2

7/04

5-

30R

ose

Can

yon

......

......

......

..

San

Die

go, C

A

14

,743

15,1

29

20,0

54

47

4

15,1

29

20

,528

35,6

57

3,

031

10/2

5/05

5-

30Si

gnal

Hill

Com

mer

ce

Cen

ter..

......

......

......

......

Si

gnal

Hill

, CA

—

1,54

2

2,31

4

—

1,54

2

2,31

4

3,85

6

109

06/1

4/06

5-

30

Wal

nut I

ndus

trial

Par

k...

..

Sign

al H

ill, C

A

—1,

417

2,

125

22

1,41

7

2,14

7

3,56

4

100

06/1

4/06

5-

30

Ros

e A

venu

e-Si

gnal

Hill

Si

gnal

Hill

, CA

—

1,

334

2,

001

80

1,33

4

2,08

1

3,41

5

95

06/1

4/06

5-

30B

eaum

ont a

t Laf

ayet

te...

..

Cha

ntill

y, V

A

—

4,73

6

11,0

51

20

0

4,73

6

11,2

51

15

,987

582

06/2

0/06

5-

30

Mea

dow

s Cor

pora

te P

ark

I Si

lver

Spr

ing,

MD

17,7

59

5,

881

25

,070

1,00

8

5,88

1

26,0

78

31

,959

780

06/2

9/06

5-

30

Wes

Tec h

-Alle

gany

......

.....

Si

lver

Spr

ing,

MD

—

2,94

4

7,51

9

24

2,

944

7,

543

10

,487

559

02/0

8/06

5-

30

Wes

Tech

-Dor

ches

ter.

......

. Si

lver

Spr

ing,

MD

—

2,07

3

5,29

6

452,

073

5,

341

7,

414

391

02/0

8/06

5-

30

Wes

Tech

-Gar

rett

I.....

......

. Si

lver

Spr

ing,

MD

—1,

733

4,

426

17

1,73

3 4,

443

6,

176

32

7 02

/08/

06

5-30

Wes

Tech

-Gar

rett

II...

......

. Si

lver

Spr

ing,

MD

—2,

442

6,

238

54

2,44

2 6,

292

8,

734

46

1 02

/08/

06

5-30

Wes

Tech

-Har

ford

Wes

t...

Si

lver

Spr

ing,

MD

—

1,

549

3,

955

2

1,54

9

3,95

7

5,50

6

292

02/0

8/06

5-

30

Wes

Tech

-Har

ford

Eas

t.....

Si

lver

Spr

ing,

MD

—

1,38

5

3,53

9—

1,38

5

3,53

9

4,92

4 26

1 02

/08/

06

5-30

W

esTe

ch-G

arre

tt II

I....

.....

Si

lver

Spr

ing,

MD

—

3,

374

8,

618

37

3,37

4 8,

655

12

,029

636

02/0

8/06

5-

30

Wes

Tech

-Tal

bot..

......

......

. Si

lver

Spr

ing,

MD

—

2,

016

5,

151

—

2,01

6 5,

151

7,

167

38

0 02

/08/

06

5-30

Wes

Tech

-Har

ford

III..

......

Si

lver

Spr

ing,

MD

—

1,86

4

4,76

0—

1,86

4

4,76

0

6,62

4

351

02/0

8/06

5-

30R

oger

s Ave

nue-

San

Jose

..

San

Jose

, CA

—

3,54

0

4,89

6

—

3,

540

4,

896

8,

436

26

10

/27/

06

5-30

Boc

a C

omm

erce

Par

k....

...

Boc

a R

aton

, FL

10,4

83

7,

436

8,

055

—

7,43

6

8,05

5

15,4

91

47

12

/08/

06

5-30

Boc

a C

omm

erce

Min

i....

..

Boc

a R

aton

, FL

—

35

9

1,20

3

—

35

9 1,

203

1,

562

3

12/0

8/06

5-

30

Wel

lingt

on C

omm

erce

Pa

rk II

I....

......

......

......

..

Wel

lingt

on, F

L

—

1,13

2

1,84

7—

1,13

2

1,84

7

2,97

9 11

12

/08/

06

5-30

Wel

lingt

on C

omm

erce

Park

II...

......

......

......

....

Wel

lingt

on, F

L

10,4

86

7,

130

11

,633

—

7,

130

11

,633

18

,763

72

12/0

8/06

5-

30W

e llin

gton

Com

mer

cePa

rk I.

......

......

......

......

..

Wel

lingt

on, F

L

3,08

5

1,35

02,

203

—

1,35

0 2,

203

3,

553

14

12

/08/

06

5-30

Wel

lingt

on C

omm

erce

Min

i III

......

......

......

......

W

ellin

gton

, FL

—

19

445

3

—

19

4

453

64

7

1 12

/08/

06

5-30

Wel

lingt

on C

omm

erce

Min

i II.

......

......

......

......

W

ellin

gton

, FL

—

21

7

507

—

217

50

7

724

1

12/0

8/06

5-

30W

ellin

gton

Com

mer

ceM

ini I

......

......

......

......

...W

ellin

gton

, FL

—

82

2

1,91

7

—

82

2

1,91

7

2,73

95

12/0

8/06

5-

30W

estw

ood.

......

......

......

......

Fa

rmer

s Bra

nch,

TX

—

941

6,

884

1,

190

94

1

8,07

4

9,01

5 1,

900

02/1

2/03

5-

30

77

In

itial

Cos

t to

Com

pany

Cos

t C

apita

lized

Subs

eque

nt

to

Acq

uisi

tion

G

ross

Am

ount

at W

hich

Car

ried

at

Dec

embe

r 31

, 200

6

Des

crip

tion

L

ocat

ion

Enc

umbr

ance

s

Lan

d

B

uild

ings

and

Impr

ovem

ents

Bui

ldin

gs

and

Impr

ovem

ents

Lan

d

Bui

ldin

gs

and

Impr

ovem

ents

T

otal

s A

ccum

ulat

ed

Dep

rec i

atio

n D

ate

Acq

uire

d

Dep

reci

able

L

ives

(Y

ears

)M

ICC

-Cen

ter 1

......

......

.....

M

iam

i, FL

—

6,50

2

7,40

9

1,10

0

6,50

2

8,50

9

15,0

11

2,04

9 12

/30/

03

5-30

MIC

C-C

ente

r 2...

......

......

..

Mia

mi,

FL—

6,

502

7,

409

1,

605

6,

502

9,

014

15

,516

1,99

1 12

/30/

03

5-30

MIC

C-C

ente

r 3...

......

......

..

Mia

mi,

FL—

7,

015

7,

993

2,

177

7,

015

10

,170

17,1

85

2,

129

12/3

0/03

5-

30

MIC

C-C

ente

r 4...

......

......

..

Mia

mi,

FL—

4,

837

5,

511

1,

280

4,

837

6,79

1

11,6

281,

634

12/3

0/03

5-

30

MIC

C-C

ente

r 5...

......

......

..

Mia

mi,

FL

—

6,20

9

5,94

0

2,65

3

6,20

9 8,

593

14

,802

1,85

1 12

/30/

03

5-30

M

ICC

-Cen

ter 6

......

......

.....

M

iam

i, FL

—

6,37

1

7,25

9

734

6,

371

7,99

3

14,3

64

1,91

8 12

/30/

03

5-30

MIC

C-C

ente

r 7...

......

......

..

Mia

mi,

FL—

5,

011

5,

710

46

6

5,01

1 6,

176

11

,187

1,

481

12/3

0/03

5-

30M

ICC

-Cen

ter 8

......

......

.....

M

iam

i, FL

—

5,39

8

6,15

0

1,00

4

5,39

8 7,

154

12

,552

1,68

7 12

/30/

03

5-30

M

ICC

-Cen

ter 9

......

......

.....

M

iam

i, FL

—

7,39

2

8,42

4

689

7,

392

9,

113

16

,505

2,

112

12/3

0/03

5-

30

MIC

C-C

ente

r 10.

......

......

..

Mia

mi,

FL

—

9,34

1

10,6

44

1,

130

9,

341

11

,774

21

,115

2,

787

12/3

0/03

5-

30M

ICC

-Cen

ter 1

2....

......

.....

M

iam

i, FL

—

3,

025

3,

447

47

7

3,02

5

3,92

4

6,94

9

861

12/3

0/03

5-

30M

ICC

-Cen

ter 1

3....

......

.....

M

iam

i, F L

—

2,

342

2,

669

18

4

2,34

2

2,85

3

5,19

5

676

12/3

0/03

5-

30M

ICC

-Cen

ter 1

4....

......

.....

M

iam

i, FL

—

5,

900

6,

723

1,

892

5,

900

8,

615

14

,515

1,

956

12/3

0/03

5-

30M

ICC

-Cen

ter 1

5....

......

.....

M

iam

i, FL

—

3,

295

3,

755

52

6

3,29

5 4,

281

7,

576

1,

038

12/3

0/03

5-

30

MIC

C-C

ente

r 16.

......

......

..

Mia

mi,

FL

—

1,26

3

1,43

9

1,66

2

1,26

3

3,10

1

4,36

4

682

12/3

0/03

5-

30M

ICC

-Cen

ter 1

7....

......

.....

M

iam

i, FL

—

2,

400

1,

249

42

8

2,40

0

1,67

7

4,07

7

310

12/3

0/03

5-

30M

ICC

-Cen

ter 1

8....

......

.....

M

iam

i,FL

—

322

36

7 49

322

41

6

738

10

012

/30/

03

5-30

MIC

C-C

ente

r 19.

......

......

..

Mia

mi,

FL

—

2,33

5

2,66

2

819

2,

335

3,

481

5,

816

91

9 12

/30/

03

5-30

MIC

C-C

ente

r 20.

......

......

..

Mia

mi,

FL

—

2,67

4

3,04

4

399

2,

674

3,

443

6,

117

80

6 12

/30/

03

5-30

Lam

ar B

oule

vard

......

......

..

Aus

tin, T

X

—

2,

528

6,

596

3,

486

2,

528

10

,082

12

,610

4,07

7 01

/01/

97

5-30

N. B

arke

r’s L

andi

ng...

......

Hou

ston

, TX

—

1,14

0

3,00

3

3,79

8

1,14

0

6,80

1

7,94

1

2,92

2 01

/01/

97

5-30

La

Pra

da...

......

......

......

......

. M

esqu

ite, T

X

—

49

5

1,23

5

365

49

5

1,60

0

2,09

5

536

01/0

1/97

5-30

NW

Hig

hway

......

......

......

..

Gar

land

, TX

—

480

1,20

3

409

48

0

1,61

2

2,09

2

524

01/0

1/97

5-30

Qua

il V

alle

y...

......

......

......

Mis

sour

i City

, TX

—

360

918

41

5 36

0

1,33

3

1,69

3

546

01/0

1/97

5-

30B

usin

ess P

arkw

ay I

......

....

Ric

hard

son,

TX

—

799

3,

568

1,

721

79

9

5,28

9

6,08

82,

071

05/0

4/98

5-

30

The

Sum

mit

......

......

......

....

Plan

o, T

X—

1,

536

6,

654

2,

008

1,53

6

8,66

2

10,1

98

3,71

3 05

/04/

98

5-30

N

orth

gate

II...

......

......

......

. D

alla

s, TX

—

1,

274

5,

505

1,

570

1,

274

7,

075

8,

349

3,

037

05/0

4/98

5-

30Em

pire

Com

mer

ce...

......

...

Dal

las,

TX

—

30

4

1,54

5

564

30

4

2,10

9

2,41

3

789

05/0

4/98

5-

30R

oyal

Tec

h-D

igita

l.....

......

Ir

ving

, TX

—

319

1,

393

34

5

319

1,

738

2,05

7

808

05/0

4/98

5-

30R

oyal

Tec

h-

Spr in

gwoo

d....

......

......

.Ir

ving

, TX

—

894

3,

824

1,22

8

894

5,

052

5,

946

2,29

8 05

/04/

98

5-30

R

oyal

Tec

h-R

egen

t.....

......

Irvi

ng, T

X

—

60

6

2,61

5

1,75

3

606

4,

368

4,

974

2,

005

05/0

4/98

5-

30

Roy

al T

ech-

Bld

g 7

......

.....

Ir

ving

, TX

—

246

1,

061

13

7

246

1,

198

1,

444

51

105

/04/

98

5-30

R

o yal

Tec

h-N

FTZ

......

......

Ir

ving

, TX

—

1,51

7

6,49

91,

408

1,

517

7,90

7

9,42

43,

604

05/0

4/98

5-

30

Roy

al T

ech-

Oly

mpu

s....

...

Irvi

ng, T

X

—

1,06

0

4,53

1

329

1,

060

4,

860

5,

920

1,

943

05/0

4/98

5-

30

Roy

al T

ech-

Hon

eyw

ell.

...

Irvi

ng, T

X

—

548

2,

347

23

2

548

2,

579

3,

127

1,

090

05/0

4/98

5-

30

Roy

al T

ech-

Bld

g 12

......

...

Irvi

ng, T

X—

1,

466

6,

263

1,

632

1,

466

7,

895

9,

361

3,

038

05/0

4/98

5-

30R

oyal

Tec

h-B

ldg

13...

......

Ir

ving

, TX

—

955

4,

080

57

1 95

5

4,65

1

5,60

61,

802

05/0

4/98

5-

30

Roy

al T

ech-

Bld

g 14

......

...

Irvi

ng, T

X—

2,

010

10

,242

1,78

1

2,01

0

12,0

23

14,0

33

4,51

6 05

/04/

98

5-30

Roy

al T

ech-

Bld

g 15

......

...

Irvi

ng, T

X—

1,

307

5,

600

1,

171

1,

307

6,

771

8,

078

2,

366

11/0

4/98

5-

30W

estc

hase

Cor

pora

te

Park

......

......

......

......

......

.H

oust

on, T

X

—

2,

173

7,33

8

802

2,

173

8,

140

10

,313

2,

719

12/3

0/99

5-

30

Ben

Whi

te 1

......

......

......

....

Aus

tin, T

X

—

78

9

3,57

1

265

789

3,

836

4,

625

1,

499

12/3

1/98

5-

30

Ben

Whi

te 5

......

......

......

....

Aus

tin, T

X

—

76

1

3,44

4

335

761

3,

779

4,

540

1,46

6 12

/31/

98

5-30

M

cKal

la 3

......

......

......

......

. A

ustin

, TX

—

662

2,

994

61

6 66

2

3,61

0

4,27

2

1,52

9 12

/31/

98

5-30

M

cKal

la 4

......

......

......

......

. A

ustin

, TX

—

749

3,

390

73

7 74

9

4,12

7

4,87

6

1,65

9 12

/31/

98

5-30

W

ater

ford

A...

......

......

......

. A

ustin

, TX

—

597

2,

752

742

597

3,

494

4,

091

1,39

2 01

/06/

99

5-30

78

In

itial

Cos

t to

Com

pany

Cos

t C

apita

lized

Subs

eque

nt

to

Acq

uisi

tion

G

ross

Am

ount

at W

hich

Car

ried

at

Dec

embe

r 31

, 200

6

Des

crip

tion

L

ocat

ion

Enc

umbr

ance

s

Lan

d

B

uild

ings

and

Impr

ovem

ents

Bui

ldin

gs

and

Impr

ovem

ents

Lan

d

Bui

ldin

gs

and

Impr

ovem

ents

T

otal

s A

ccum

ulat

ed

Dep

rec i

atio

n D

ate

Acq

uire

d

Dep

reci

able

L

ives

(Y

ears

)W

ater

ford

B...

......

......

......

.A

ustin

, TX

—

367

1,

672

38

7 36

7

2,05

9

2,42

6

776

05/2

0/99

5-

30W

ater

ford

C...

......

......

......

.A

ustin

, TX

—

1,14

45,

225

52

6

1,14

4

5,75

1

6,89

5

2,08

8 05

/20/

99

5-30

M

cNei

l 6...

......

......

......

......

A

ustin

, TX

—

43

7

2,01

3

957

437

2,

970

3,

407

1,

220

01/0

6/09

5-

30R

utla

nd 1

1...

......

......

......

...

Aus

tin, T

X

—

32

5

1,53

6

122

325

1,

658

1,

983

59

6 01

/06/

99

5-30

R

utla

nd 1

2...

......

......

......

...

Aus

tin, T

X

—

53

5

2,48

7

313

535

2,

800

3,

335

1,

122

01/0

6/99

5-

30R

utla

nd 1

3...

......

......

......

...

Aus

tin, T

X

—

46

9

2,19

0

272

469

2,

462

2,

931

88

4 01

/06/

99

5-30

R

utla

nd 1

4...

......

......

......

...

Aus

tin, T

X

—

53

5

2,42

2

252

535

2,

674

3,

209

1,

083

12/3

1/98

5-

30R

utla

nd 1

9...

......

......

......

...

Aus

tin, T

X

—

15

8

762

1,

678

158

2,

440

2,

598

81

9 01

/06/

995-

30R

oyal

Tec

h-B

ldg

16...

......

Ir

ving

, TX

—

2,46

4

2,70

3 3,

130

2,

464

5,

833

8,

297

1,

326

07/0

1/99

5-

30

Roy

al T

ech-

Bld

g 17

......

...

Irvi

ng,T

X—

1,

832

6,

901

1,60

1

1,83

2

8,50

2

10,3

34

2,22

4 08

/15/

01

5-30

M

onro

e B

usin

ess C

ente

r..

Her

ndon

, VA

—

5,92

6

13,9

44

5,

759

5,

926

19

,703

25,6

29

7,77

0 08

/01/

97

5-30

Lu

sk II

-R&

D...

......

......

.....

Sa

n D

iego

, CA

—

1,07

7

2,64

4 33

21,

077

2,

976

4,

053

987

03/1

7/98

5-

30

Lusk

II-O

ffic

e....

......

......

...

San

Die

go, C

A

—

1,

230

3,

005

1,

153

1,

230

4,

158

5,

388

1,

536

03/1

7/98

5-

30N

orris

Cn-

Off

ice

......

......

..

San

Ram

on, C

A

—

1,

486

3,

642

777

1,

486

4,

419

5,

905

1,63

8 03

/17/

98

5-30

N

orth

poin

te D

......

......

......

. St

erlin

g, V

A

—

78

7

2,85

7

1,38

2

787

4,

239

5,

026

2,

174

06/1

1/98

5-

30M

onro

e II

......

......

......

......

..

Her

ndon

, VA

—

811

4,

967

795

81

1 5,

762

6,

573

2,

296

01/2

9/99

5-

30

Met

ro P

ark

I.....

......

......

.....

R

ockv

ille,

MD

—

5,38

3

15,4

04

2,

430

5,38

3

17,8

34

23,2

175,

838

12/2

7/01

5-

30

Met

ro P

ark

I R&

D...

......

...

Roc

kvill

e, M

D

—

5,

404

15

,748

4,46

2

5,40

4 20

,210

25

,614

7,

304

12/2

7/01

5-

30M

etro

Par

k II

......

......

......

..

Roc

kvill

e, M

D

—

1,22

3

3,49

0

623

1,22

3

4,11

3

5,33

6

1,50

0 12

/27/

01

5-30

M

etro

Par

k II

......

......

......

..

Roc

kvill

e, M

D

—

2,28

7

6,53

3

1,52

6

2,28

7 8,

059

10

,346

3,

004

12/2

7/01

5-

30

Met

ro P

ark

III.

......

......

......

Roc

kvill

e, M

D

—

4,

555

13

,039

4,12

04,

555

17

,159

21

,714

6,24

5 12

/27/

01

5-30

M

etro

Par

k IV

......

......

......

. R

ockv

ille,

MD

—

4,

188

12

,035

711

4,18

8

12,7

46

16,9

34

4,13

9 12

/27/

01

5-30

M

etro

Par

k V

......

......

......

..R

ockv

ille,

MD

—

9,81

328

,214

3,69

89,

813

31

,912

41

,725

10,5

96

12/2

7/01

5-

30

Kea

rny

Mes

a-O

ffic

e....

.....

Sa

n D

iego

, CA

—

785

1,

933

1,

044

785

2,

977

3,

762

1,10

4 03

/17/

98

5-30

Kea

rny

Mes

a-R

&D

......

....

San

Die

go, C

A

—

2,

109

5,

156

55

7

2,10

9

5,71

3

7,82

21,

863

03/1

7/98

5-

30B

ren

Mar

-Off

ice.

......

......

..

Ale

xand

ria, V

A

—

57

2

1,40

1

1,87

3 57

2

3,27

4

3,84

61,

324

03/1

7/98

5-

30Lu

sk II

I....

......

......

......

......

. Sa

n D

iego

, CA

—

1,90

4

4,66

2

736

1,

904

5,

398

7,

302

1,77

3 03

/17/

98

5-30

Bre

n M

ar-R

&D

......

......

....

Ale

xand

ria, V

A

—

1,

625

3,

979

56

9

1,62

5

4,54

8

6,17

3

1,48

3 03

/17/

98

5-30

Alb

an R

oad-

Off

ice.

......

....

Sprin

gfie

ld, V

A

—

988

2,

418

2,

739

98

8 5,

157

6,

145

2,

043

03/1

7/98

5-

30A

lban

Roa

d-R

&D

......

......

. Sp

ringf

ield

, VA

—

94

7

2,31

8

499

94

7

2,81

7

3,76

4

1,01

4 03

/17/

98

5-30

$67

,048

$

439,

777

$ 1

,123

,641

$

229,

801

$ 43

9,77

7 $

1,35

3,44

2$

1,79

3,21

9 $

44

1,33

6

79

SIGNATURES

Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Registrant hasduly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.

Dated: February 27, 2007

PS BUSINESS PARKS, INC.

By: /s/ Joseph D. Russell, Jr. Joseph D. Russell, Jr. President and Chief Executive Officer

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.

Signature Title Date

/s/ Ronald L. Havner, Jr. Chairman of the Board February 27, 2007Ronald L. Havner, Jr.

/s/ Joseph D. Russell, Jr. President, Director and Chief February 27, 2007 Joseph D. Russell, Jr. Executive Officer (principal

executive officer)

/s/ Edward A. Stokx Chief Financial Officer (principal February 27, 2007 Edward A. Stokx financial officer and principal

accounting officer)

/s/ Vern O. Curtis Director February 27, 2007Vern O. Curtis

/s/ Arthur M. Friedman Director February 27, 2007Arthur M. Friedman

/s/ James H. Kropp Director February 27, 2007James H. Kropp

/s/ Harvey Lenkin Director February 27, 2007Harvey Lenkin

/s/ Alan K. Pribble Director February 27, 2007Alan K. Pribble

/s/ R. Wesley Burns Director February 27, 2007R. Wesley Burns

/s/ Michael V. McGee Director February 27, 2007Michael V. McGee

80

PS BUSINESS PARKS, INC.

EXHIBIT INDEX(Items 15(a)(3) and 15(b))

2.1 Amended and Restated Agreement and Plan of Reorganization among Registrant, American Office Park Properties, Inc. (“AOPP”) and Public Storage, Inc. (“PSI”) dated as of December 17, 1997.Filed with Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form S-4 (No. 333-45405) and incorporated herein by reference.

3.1 Restated Articles of Incorporation. Filed with Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form S-3(No. 333-78627) and incorporated herein by reference.

3.2 Certificate of Determination of Preferences of 8.75% Series C Cumulatif ve Redeemable Preferred Stock of PS Business Parks, Inc. Filed with Registrant’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 1999 (SEC File No. 001-10709) and incorporated herein by reference.

3.3 Certificate of Determination of Preferences of 8.875% Series X Cumulative Redeemable Preferred fStock of PS Business Parks, Inc. Filed with Registrant’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 1999 (SEC File No. 001-10709) and incorporated herein by reference.

3.4 Amendment to Certificate of Determination of Preferences of 8.875% Series X Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock of PS Business Parks, Inc. Filed with Registrant’s Quarterly Report onForm 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 1999 (SEC File No. 001-10709) and incorporated herein by reference.

3.5 Certificate of Determination of Preferences of 8.875% Series Y Cumulative Redeemable Preferred fStock of PS Business Parks, Inc. Filed with Registrant’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2000 (SEC File No. 001-10709) and incorporated herein by reference.

3.6 Certificate of Determination of Preferences of 9.50% Series D Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock of PS Business Parks, Inc. Filed with Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated May 7,2001 (SEC File No. 001-10709) and incorporated herein by reference.

3.7 Amendment to Certificate of Determination of Preferences of 9.50% Series D Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock of PS Business Parks, Inc. Filed with Registrant’s Quarterly Report onForm 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2001 (SEC File No. 001-10709) and incorporated herein by reference.

3.8 Certificate of Determination of Preferences of 9¼% Series E Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock of PS Business Parks, Inc. Filed with Registrant’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2001 (SEC File No. 001-10709) and incorporated herein by reference.

3.9 Certificate of Determination of Preferences of 8.75% Series F Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock of PS Business Parks, Inc. Filed with Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated January 18, 2002 (SEC File No. 001-10709) and incorporated herein by reference.

3.10 Certificate of Determination of Preferences of 7.95% Series G Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock of PS Business Parks, Inc. Filed with Registrant’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2003 and incorporated herein by reference.

3.11 Certificate of Determination of Preferences of 7.00% Series H Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock of PS Business Parks, Inc. filed with Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated January 16, 2004 and incorporated herein by reference. d

3.12 Certificate of Determination of Preferences of 6.875% Series I Cumulative Redeemable Preferred fStock of PS Business Parks, Inc. Filed with Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated March 31, 2004 and incorporated herein by reference.

3.13 Certificate of Determination of Preferences of 7.50% Series J Cumulative Redeemable Preferred fStock of PS Business Parks, Inc. Filed with Registrant’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for thequarter ended June 30, 2004 and incorporated herein by reference.

81

3.14 Certificate of Determination of Preferences of 7.950% Series K Cumulative Redeemable Preferred fStock of PS Business Parks, Inc. Filed with Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated June 24, 2004 and incorporated herein by reference. d

3.15 Certificate of Determination of Preferences of 7.60% Series L Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock of PS Business Parks, Inc. Filed with Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated August 23, 2004 and incorporated herein by reference. d

3.16 Certificate of Correction of Certificate of Determination of Preferences for the 7.00% CumulativePreferred Stock, Series H of PS Business Parks, Inc. Filed with Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated October 18, 2004 and incorporated herein by reference.

3.17 Amendment to Certificate of Determination of Preferences for the 7.00% Cumulative Preferred Stock, Series H of PS Business Parks, Inc. Filed with Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated October 18, 2004 and incorporated herein by reference.

3.18 Certificate of Determination of Preferences of 7.20% Cumulative Preferred Stock, Series M of PS Business Parks, Inc. Filed with Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated April 29, 2005 and incorporated herein by reference.

3.19 Certificate of Determination of Preferences of 7 % Series N Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock of PS Business Parks, Inc. Filed with Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated December 16, 2005 and incorporated herein by reference.

3.20 Certificate of Determination of Preferences of 7.375% Series O Cumulative Redeemable Preferred fStock of PS Business Parks, Inc. Filed with Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated May 18, 2006 and incorporated herein by reference.

3.21 Certificate of Correction of Certificate of Determination of Preferences of 7.375% CumulativePreferred Stock, Series O of PS Business Parks, Inc. Filed with Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated August 10, 2006 and incorporated herein by reference.

3.22 Amendment to Certificate of Determination of Preferences of 7.375% Series O CumulativeRedeemable Preferred Stock of PS Business Parks, Inc. Filed with Registrant’s Current Report onForm 8-K dated August 10, 2006 and incorporated herein by reference.

3.23 Certificate of Determination of Preferences of 6.70% Series P Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock of PS Business Parks, Inc. Filed with Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated January 9, 2007 and incorporated herein by reference.

3.24 Restated Bylaws. Filed with Registrant’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2006 and incorporated herein by reference

4.1 Deposit Agreement Relating to 7.00% Cumulative Preferred Stock, Series H of PS Business Parks,Inc., dated as of January 15, 2004. Filed with Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated January 15, 2004 and incorporated herein by reference.

4.2 Specimen Stock Certificate for Registrant’s 7.00% Cumulative Preferred Stock, Series H. Filed with Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated January 15, 2004 and incorporated herein by reference.

4.3 Deposit Agreement Relating to 6.875% Cumulative Preferred Stock, Series I of PS Business Parks, Inc., dated as of March 31, 2004. Filed with Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated March31, 2004 and incorporated herein by reference.

4.4 Specimen Stock Certificate for Registrant’s 6.875% Cumulative Preferred Stock, Series I. Filed with Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated March 31, 2004 and incorporated herein by reference.

4.5 Deposit Agreement Relating to 7.95% Cumulative Preferred Stock, Series K of PS Business Parks,Inc., dated as of June 24, 2004. Filed with Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated June 24, 2004 and incorporated herein by reference.

82

4.6 Specimen Stock Certificate for Registrant’s 7.95% Cumulative Preferred Stock, Series K. Filed with Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated June 24, 2004 and incorporated herein by reference.

4.7 Deposit Agreement Relating to 7.60% Cumulative Preferred Stock, Series L of PS Business Parks,Inc., dated as of August 23, 2004. Filed with Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated August 23, 2004 and incorporated herein by reference.

4.8 Specimen Stock Certificate for Registrant’s 7.60% Cumulative Preferred Stock, Series L. Filed with Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated August 23, 2004 and incorporated herein by reference.

4.9 Deposit Agreement Relating to 7.20% Cumulative Preferred Stock, Series M of PS Business Parks,Inc., dated as of April 27, 2005. Filed with Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated April 27, 2005 and incorporated herein by reference. d

4.10 Specimen Stock Certificate for Registrant’s 7.20% Cumulative Preferred Stock, Series M. Filed with Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated April 27, 2005 and incorporated herein by reference.

4.11 Deposit Agreement Relating to 7.375% Cumulative Preferred Stock, Series O of PS BusinessParks, Inc., dated as of May 18, 2006. Filed with Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated May 18, 2006 and incorporated herein by reference.

4.12 Specimen Stock Certificate for Registrant’s 7.375% Cumulative Preferred Stock, Series O. Filed with Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated May 18, 2006 and incorporated herein byreference.

4.13 Deposit Agreement Relating to 6.70% Cumulative Preferred Stock, Series P of PS Business Parks,Inc., dated as of January 9, 2007. Filed with Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated January 9, 2007 and incorporated herein by reference.

4.14 Specimen Stock Certificate for Registrant’s 6.70% Cumulative Preferred Stock, Series P. Filed with Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated January 9, 2007 and incorporated herein by reference.

10.1 Amended Management Agreement between Storage Equities, Inc. and Public Storage CommercialProperties Group, Inc. dated as of February 21, 1995. Filed with PSI’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1994 (SEC File No. 001-08389) and incorporated herein by reference.

10.2 Agreement of Limited Partnership of PS Business Parks, L.P. Filed with Registrant’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 1998 (SEC File No. 001-10709) and incorporated herein by reference.

10.3 Agreement Among Shareholders and Company dated as of December 23, 1997 among Acquiport Two Corporation, AOPP, American Office Park Properties, L.P. (“AOPP LP”) and PSI. Filed with Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form S-4 (No. 333-45405) and incorporated herein by reference.

10.4 Amendment to Agreement Among Shareholders and Company dated as of January 21, 1998 among Acquiport Two Corporation, AOPP, AOPP LP and PSI. Filed with Registrant’s Registration Statement No. on Form S-4 (333-45405) and incorporated herein by reference.

10.5 Non-Competition Agreement dated as of December 23, 1997 among PSI, AOPP, AOPP LP and Acquiport Two Corporation. Filed with Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form S-4 (No. 333-45405) and incorporated herein by reference.

10.6* Offer Letter/ Employment Agreement between Registrant and Joseph D. Russell, Jr., dated as of September 6, 2002. Filed with Registrant’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2003 and incorporated herein by reference.

83

10.7 Form of Indemnity Agreement. Filed with Registrant’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 1998 (SEC File No. 001-10709) and incorporated herein by reference.

10.8* Form of Indemnification Agreement for Executive Officers. Filed with Registrant’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004 and incorporated herein by reference.

10.9 Cost Sharing and Administrative Services Agreement dated as of November 16, 1995 by and among PSCC, Inc. and the owners listed therein. Filed with Registrant’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 1998 (SEC File No. 001-10709) and incorporated herein byreference.

10.10 Amendment to Cost Sharing and Administrative Services Agreement dated as of January 2, 1997by and among PSCC, Inc. and the owners listed therein. Filed with Registrant’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 1998 (SEC File No. 001-10709) and incorporated herein by reference.

10.11 Accounts Payable and Payroll Disbursement Services Agreement dated as of January 2, 1997 byand between PSCC, Inc. and AOPP LP. Filed with Registrant’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 1998 (SEC File No. 001-10709) and incorporated herein by reference.

10.12 Amendment to Agreement of Limited Partnership of PS Business Parks, L.P. Relating to 8.875%Series B Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Units, dated as of April 23, 1999. Filed withRegistrant’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 1999 (SEC File No. 001- 10709) and incorporated herein by reference.

10.13 Amendment to Agreement of Limited Partnership of PS Business Parks, L.P. Relating to 9.25% Series A Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Units, dated as of April 30, 1999. Filed withRegistrant’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 1999 (SEC File No. 001-10709) and incorporated herein by reference.

10.14 Amendment to Agreement of Limited Partnership of PS Business Parks, L.P. Relating to 8.75% Series C Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Units, dated as of September 3, 1999. Filed withRegistrant’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 1999 (SEC File No. 001-10709) and incorporated herein by reference.

10.15 Amendment to Agreement of Limited Partnership of PS Business Parks, L.P. Relating to 8.875%Series X Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Units, dated as of September 7, 1999. Filed with Registrant’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 1999 (SEC File No. 001-10709) and incorporated herein by reference.

10.16 Amendment to Agreement of Limited Partnership of PS Business Parks, L.P. Relating toAdditional 8.875% Series X Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Units, dated as of September 23, 1999. Filed with Registrant’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 1999 (SEC File No. 001-10709) and incorporated herein by reference.

10.17 Amendment to Agreement of Limited Partnership of PS Business Parks, L.P. Relating to 8.875%Series Y Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Units, dated as of July 12, 2000. Filed withRegistrant’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2000 (SEC File No.001-10709) and incorporated herein by reference.

10.18 Amendment to Agreement of Limited Partnership of PS Business Parks, L.P. Relating to 9.50% Series D Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Units, dated as of May 10, 2001. Filed with Registrant’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2001 (SEC File No. 001-10709) and incorporated herein by reference.

10.19 Amendment No. 1 to Amendment to Agreement of Limited Partnership of PS Business Parks, L.P. Relating to 9.50% Series D Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Units, dated as of June 18, 2001.Filed with Registrant’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2001 (SEC File No. 001-10709) and incorporated herein by reference.

84

10.20 Amendment to Agreement of Limited Partnership of PS Business Parks, L.P. Relating to 9¼% Series E Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Units, dated as of September 21, 2001. Filed withRegistrant’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2001 (SEC File No. 001-10709) and incorporated herein by reference.

10.21 Amendment to Agreement of Limited Partnership of PS Business Parks, L.P. Relating to 8.75% Series F Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Units, dated as of January 18, 2002. Filed withRegistrant’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2001 (SEC File No.001-10709) and incorporated herein by reference.

10.22 Amendment to Agreement of Limited Partnership of PS Business Parks, L.P. Relating to 7.95% Series G Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Units, dated as of October 30, 2002. Filed with Registrant’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2003 and incorporated mherein by reference.

10.23 Amendment to Agreement of Limited Partnership of PS Business Parks, L.P. Relating to 7.00%Series H Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Units, dated as of January 16, 2004. Filed withRegistrant’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2003 and incorporated mherein by reference.

10.24 Amendment to Agreement of Limited Partnership of PS Business Parks, L.P. Relating to 6.875%Series I Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Units, dated as of April 21, 2004. Filed with Registrant’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2004 and incorporated herein by reference.

10.25 Amendment to Agreement of Limited Partnership of PS Business Parks, L.P. Relating to 7.50%Series J Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Units, dated as of May 27, 2004. Filed with Registrant’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2004 and incorporated herein by reference.

10.26 Amendment No. 1 to Amendment to Agreement of Limited Partnership of PS Business Parks, L.P.Relating to 7.50% Series J Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Units, dated as of June 17, 2004. Filed with Registrant’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2004 and incorporated herein by reference.

10.27 Amendment to Agreement of Limited Partnership of PS Business Parks, L.P. Relating to 7.95%Series K Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Units, dated as of June 30, 2004, filed withRegistrant’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004 and incorporated mherein by reference.

10.28 Amendment to Agreement of Limited Partnership of PS Business Parks, L.P. Relating to 7.60%Series L Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Units, dated as of August 31, 2004. Filed with Registrant’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2004 and incorporated herein by reference.

10.29 Amendment No. 1 to Amendment to Agreement of Limited Partnership of PS Business Parks, L.P.Relating to 7.00% Series H Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Units, dated as of October 25, 2004. Filed with Registrant’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2004 and incorporated herein by reference.

10.30 Amendment to Agreement of Limited Partnership of PS Business Parks, L.P. Relating to 7.20%Series M Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Units, dated as of May 2, 2005. Filed with Registrant’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2005 and incorporated herein by reference.

10.31 Amendment No. 1 to Amendment to Agreement of Limited Partnership Relating to 7.20% Series M Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Units, dated as of May 9, 2005. Filed with Registrant’sQuarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2005 and incorporated herein by reference.

85

10.32 Amendment to Agreement of Limited Partnership of PS Business Parks, L.P. Relating to 7 %Series N Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Units, dated as of December 12, 2005. Filed withRegistrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated December 16, 2005 and incorporated herein by reference.

10.33 Amendment to Agreement of Limited Partnership of PS Business Parks, L.P. Relating to 7.375%Series O Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Units, dated as of June 16, 2006. Filed withRegistrant’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2006 and incorporated herein by reference.

10.34 Amendment No. 1 to Amendment to Agreement of Limited Partnership of PS Business Parks, L.P. Relating to7.375% Series O Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Units, dated as of August 16, 2006. Filed herewith.

10.35 Amendment to Agreement of Limited Partnership of PS Business Parks, L.P. Relating to 6.70% Series P Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Units, dated as of January 9, 2007. Filed herewith.

10.36 Registration Rights Agreement by and between PS Business Parks, Inc. and GSEP 2001 Realty Corporation, dated as of September 21, 2001, relating to 9¼% Series E Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Units. Filed with Registrant’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2005 and incorporated herein by reference.

10.37 Registration Rights Agreement by and between PS Business Parks, Inc. and GSEP 2002 Realty Corp., dated as of October 30, 2002, relating to 7.95% Series G Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Units. Filed with Registrant’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2005and incorporated herein by reference.

10.38 Amended and Restated Registration Rights Agreement by and between PS Business Parks, Inc. and GSEP 2004 Realty Corp., dated as of June 17, 2004, relating to 7.50% Series J CumulativeRedeemable Preferred Units. Filed with Registrant’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2005 and incorporated herein by reference.

10.39 Registration Rights Agreement by and between PS Business Parks, Inc. and GSEP 2005 Realty Corp., dated as of December 12, 2005. Filed with Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated December 16, 2005 and incorporated herein by reference.

10.40 Term Loan Agreement dated as of February 20, 2002 among PS Business Parks, L.P. and Fleet National Bank, as Agent. Filed with the Registrant’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2003 and incorporated herein by reference.

10.41 Amended and Restated Revolving Credit Agreement dated as of October 29, 2002 among PS Business Parks, L.P., Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as Agent, and the Lenders named therein. Filed with Registrant’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,2002 (SEC File No. 001-10709) and incorporated herein by reference.

10.42 Modification Agreement, dated as of December 29, 2003. Filed with the Registrant’s AnnualReport on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2003 and incorporated herein by reference.This exhibit modifies the Amended and Restated Revolving Credit Agreement dated as of October 29, 2002 and filed with the Registrant’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2002 (SEC File No. 001-10709) and incorporated herein by reference.

10.43 Modification Agreement, dated as of January 23, 2004. Filed with the Registrant’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2003 and incorporated herein by reference. This exhibit modifies the Modification Agreement dated as of December 29, 2003 and filed with theRegistrant’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2003 and incorporated mherein by reference.

10.44 Third Modification Agreement, dated as of August 5, 2005. Filed with the Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated August 5, 2005 and incorporated herein by reference. This exhibit modifies the Modification Agreement dated as of January 23, 2004 and filed with the Registrant’sAnnual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2003 and incorporated herein byreference.

86

10.45 Letter Agreement, dated as of December 29, 2003, between Public Storage, Inc. and PS Business Parks, L.P. Filed with the Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated January 14, 2004 and incorporated herein by reference.

10.46* Registrant’s 1997 Stock Option and Incentive Plan. Filed with Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form S-8 (No. 333-48313) and incorporated herein by reference.

10.47* Registrant’s 2003 Stock Option and Incentive Plan. Filed with Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form S-8 (No. 333-104604) and incorporated herein by reference.

10.48* Retirement Plan for Non-Employee Directors. Filed with Registrant’s Registration Statement onForm S-8 (No. 333-129463) and incorporated herein by reference.

10.49* Form of PS Business Parks, Inc. Restricted Stock Unit Agreement. Filed with Registrant’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2004 and incorporated herein by reference.

10.50* Form of PS Business Parks, Inc. 2003 Stock Option and Incentive Plan Non-Qualified StockOption Agreement. Filed with Registrant’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2004 and incorporated herein by reference.

10.51* Form of PS Business Parks, Inc. 2003 Stock Option and Incentive Plan Stock Option Agreement.Filed with Registrant’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2004 and incorporated herein by reference.

12 Statement re: Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges. Filed herewith.

21 List of Subsidiaries. Filed herewith.

23 Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm. Filed herewith.

31.1 Certification of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. Filed herewith.

31.2 Certification of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. Filed herewith.

32.1 Certification of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. Filed herewith.

____________ * Management contract or compensatory plan or arrangement

87

Exhibit 12

PS BUSINESS PARKS, INC.STATEMENT RE: COMPUTATION OF RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES

(in thousands, except ratio data)

2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 Income from continuing operations............................. $ 62,937 $ 59,674 $ 46,564 $ 46,326 $ 45,916Minority interest in continuing operations................... 16,268 16,262 24,785 29,638 28,271Interest expense ........................................................... 2,575 1,330 3,054 4,015 5,324Earnings from continuing operations available to

cover fixed charges.................................................... $ 81,780 $ 77,266 $ 74,403 $ 79,979 $ 79,511Fixed charges (2) ......................................................... $ 2,575 $ 1,330 $ 3,054 $ 4,015 $ 5,612Preferred stock dividends ............................................ 47,933 43,011 33,020 15,784 15,412Preferred partnership distributions .............................. 11,155 10,651 20,245 19,240 17,927Combined fixed charges and preferred distributions ... $ 61,663 $ 54,992 $ 56,319 $ 39,039 $ 38,951Ratio of earnings from continuing operations to fixed

charges....................................................................... 31.8 58.1 24.4 19.9 14.2Ratio of earnings from continuing operations to

combined fixed charges and preferred distributions .. 1.3 1.4 1.3 2.0 2.0

Supplemental disclosure of Ratio of Funds from Operations (“FFO”) to fixed charges:

2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 FFO (1) ........................................................................ $ 106,235 $ 102,463 $ 97,214 $ 97,448 $ 104,543Interest expense ........................................................... 2,575 1,330 3,054 4,015 5,324Minority interest in income — preferred units ............ 11,155 10,651 20,245 19,240 17,927Preferred stock dividends ............................................ 47,933 43,011 33,020 15,784 15,412FFO available to cover fixed charges .......................... $ 167,898 $ 157,455 $ 153,533 $ 136,487 $ 143,206Fixed charges (2) ......................................................... $ 2,575 $ 1,330 $ 3,054 $ 4,015 $ 5,612Preferred stock dividends (3)....................................... 44,553 43,011 31,154 15,784 15,412Preferred partnership distributions (3)......................... 9,789 10,350 17,106 19,240 17,927Combined fixed charges and preferred distributions

paid ............................................................................ $ 56,917 $ 54,691 $ 51,314 $ 39,039 $ 38,951Ratio of adjusted FFO to fixed charges ....................... 65.2 118.4 50.3 34.0 25.5Ratio of adjusted FFO to combined fixed charges and

preferred distributions paid........................................ 2.9 2.9 3.0 3.5 3.7____________(1) FFO has been adjusted to include the effect of impairment charges

(2) Fixed charges include interest expense plus capitalized interest

(3) Excludes EITF Topic D-42 distributions.

88

Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Joseph D. Russell, Jr. certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of PS Business Parks, Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report,fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of theregistrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosurecontrols and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have:

(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

(b) Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance withgenerally accepted accounting principles;

(c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in thisreport our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

(d) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that ttoccurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have dirr sclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internalcontrol over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registdd rant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

/s/ Joseph D. Russell, Jr. Name: Joseph D. Russell, Jr. Title: Chief Executive Officer Date: February 27, 2007

89

Exhibit 31.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Edward A. Stokx certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of PS Business Parks, Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report,fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of theregistrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosurecontrols and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have:

(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

(b) Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliabilityof financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance withgenerally accepted accounting principles;

(c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in thisreport our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

(d) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that ttoccurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have dirr sclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internalcontrol over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registdd rant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

/s/ Edward A. Stokx Name: Edward A. Stokx Title: Chief Financial Officer Date: February 27, 2007

90

Exhibit 32.1

Certification of CEO and CFO Pursuant to18 U.S.C. Section 1350,as Adopted Pursuant to

Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K of PS Business Parks, Inc. (the “Company”) for the period ending December 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),Joseph D. Russell Jr., as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Edward A. Stokx, as Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial conditionand results of operations of the Company.

/s/ Joseph D. Russell, Jr. Name: Joseph D. Russell, Jr.Title: Chief Executive Officer Date: February 27, 2007

/s/ Edward A. Stokx Name: Edward A. Stokx Title: Chief Financial Officer Date: February 27, 2007

(This Page Intentionally Left Blank)

(This Page Intentionally Left Blank)

Corporate Headquarters

701 Western AvenueGlendale, California 91201-2349(818) 244-8080 Telephone(818) 242-0566 Facsimile

Website

www.psbusinessparks.com

Board of Directors

RONALD L. HAVNER, JR. (1998)Chairman of the BoardVice-Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer of Public Storage, Inc.

JOSEPH D. RUSSELL, JR. (2003)President and Chief Executive Officer

R. WESLEY BURNS (2005)Consulting Managing DirectorPIMCO

VERN O. CURTIS (1990)Private Investor

ARTHUR M. FRIEDMAN (1998)Private Investor

JAMES H. KROPP (1998)Senior Vice President – Investments Gazit Group USA, Inc.

HARVEY LENKIN (1998)Retired President and Chief Operating Officer Public Storage, Inc.

MICHAEL V. McGEE (2006)President and Chief Executive Officer Pardee Homes

ALAN K. PRIBBLE (1998)Private Investor

( ) = date director was elected to the Board

Transfer Agent

American Stock Transfer & Trust Company59 Maiden LaneNew York, NY 10038

Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

Ernst & Young LLPLos Angeles, CA

Stock Listing

PS Business Parks, Inc. is traded on the AmericanStock Exchange under the symbol “PSB.”

Executive Officers

JOSEPH D. RUSSELL, JR.President and Chief Executive Officer

JOHN W. PETERSENExecutive Vice President and Chief OperatingOfficer

EDWARD A. STOKXExecutive Vice President, Chief FinancialOfficer and Secretary

M. BRETT FRANKLINSenior Vice President, Acquisitions andDispositions

MARIA R. HAWTHORNESenior Vice President, East Coast

Vice Presidents

COBY A. HOLLEYVice President, Pacific Northwest Division

ROBIN E. MATHERVice President, Southern California Division

WILLIAM A. McFAULVice President, Washington Metro Division

EDDIE F. RUIZVice President, Director of Facilities

VIOLA I. SANCHEZVice President, Southeast Division

DAVID A. VICARSVice President, Midwest

Regional and Corporate Management

TRENTON A. GROVESCorporate Controller

STUART H. HUTCHISONRegional Manager, Southern California

ANDREW A. MIRCOVICHRegional Manager, Southern California

EUGENE UHLMANRegional Manager, Maryland

DAVID C. WEINSTEINRegional Manager, Northern California

CORPORATE DATAPS Business Parks, Inc.

701 Western Avenue, Glendale, California 91201-2349 • (818) 244-8080 • www.psbusinessparks.com

P S B U S I N E S S P A R K S , I N C .